[Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I plan to duplicate the 1998 Focardi Ni-H cell as per 
http://www.lenr-canr.org/acrobat/FocardiSlargeexces.pdf except for the 
water jacket and confirm or not his reported results.


I have a really nicely fitted out workshop with toys like lathes, mills, 
pulse welders, medium and high vacuum pumps, bell jars, and tech toys 
like digital scopes, logic analyzers, electronic microscopes, data 
recorders, temperature, pH and radiation meters (might need a new one 
here), variable AC and DC power supplies, several laptop computers, 
video and still digital cameras, etc.


Duplicating the 1998 Focardi cell should not be difficult, especially if 
I put my cell, totally wrapped in 2-3 cm of lead, in a old fish tank 
full of water and measure the temperature increase of the water. Should 
not be that difficult to do non H applied runs and compare with runs 
that have H supply turned on. Doing the calorimetry this way to me seems 
much simpler as all I need is a fish tank pump and water stirrer to 
circulate the water in the fish tank and use say 6 thermocouples around 
the tank to get an average water temperature. Then all that is required 
to do is to measure the increased water temperature versus applied power 
over time with H and no H applied to the cell.


I may be proved wrong but I suspect Rossi's secret powder is nothing 
more than an attempt to lead replicators away from the public Focardi 
1998 cell results which reportedly only used a solid Ni rod. I also have 
a few uni physics professors that would be very interested in having a 
look at what is happening inside the Ni rod.


As Vortex seems to be the only group of people who have some experience 
in what I'm attempting to do and hopefully will not flame me to death, 
any suggestions would be most welcome. I do intent to openly publish the 
results as well as cell construction drawings / BOM but do not intent to 
commercialize the product as I already have a good day job in the power 
industry.


Aussie Guy

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Yes I have read that. But first I plan to try to duplicate the 1998 
Focardi cell as closely as I can. I have emailed Focardi and asked for 
the dimensions of the cell and construction material and informed him I 
plan to replicate. I'm just a power system engineer and not a 
physicists, so I do hope he replies. If not I'll guess at the rod 
dimensions, see what I can get that is close and work from there.


After that I will try fine / nano Ni powder baked at 500 deg C in a hard 
vacuum as Rossi and other have suggested, that is if I can find someone 
to do that as my workshop / lab can't do that kind of high temperature 
processing.


Any suggestions for a source of nano Ni powder?


On 11/8/2011 4:34 PM, Robert Leguillon wrote:

Rossi's largest contribution to improving on the Piantelli-Focardi work, may 
have been his suggestion at using nano-nickel. The increased surface area, and 
available crystalline lattice has been garnering a lot of attention. Variations 
in particle size and, possibly more importantly, surface typography may come 
into play.
Even when it comes to Pd cathodes, in other LENR experiments, surface 
preparation seems a key variable in successful replication.
Just something to think about

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I have read Focardi did heat treat the Ni rod, which I also intend to 
do. I also understand there can be problems with the Ni rod becoming H 
loaded and producing heat when there is no external heating applied. I 
do note Focardi does show a vacuum supply that can be applied to the 
cell and with his 300 watts of thermal heat, the rod would get quite hot 
as in a vacuum, it's ability to radiate heat away would be reduced.


Here is a question I'm sure Vortex can answer a lot quicker and easier 
than I can.


Assuming a 10mm dia Ni rod 50 mm long, inserted inside a high temp 
ceramic coil form, which is wrapped with high temp wire and in a vacuum. 
How much power would need to be applied to get the Ni rod to 500 deg C? 
Is this possible or would I need to use a more exotic heat source? IE 
how to get a Ni rod to 500 deg C in a vacuum without breaking my several 
thousand dollar budget?



On 11/8/2011 4:44 PM, David Roberson wrote:
The vortex group can really put on the heat on occasions.  I salute 
you for planning to actually do a test, but you must realize that 
Focardi heat treated his nickel in some manner before it worked if I 
recall. Do not be too surprised if you are not successful at first as 
that has always been the curse of LENR research.

You are fortunate to have such a well stocked laboratory.
Be careful to take into consideration the heat conductivity of 
hydrogen if you do an A-B test.  It is not as simple as it looks to 
make a system such as this perform.

I wish you good luck and stay safe.
Dave

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Focardi has disclosed some data on how the Ni rods were prepared which 
seems doable:


"In order to compare samples having the same surface but different 
bulks, the metal
rods used in the experiments described here (stainless steel for cell A 
and nickel for cell
B) were coated with a thick ( 0.1 mm) nickel layer by the usual 
nickel-plating bath [7]
containing the following components: Nickel Ammonium Sulphate, Citric 
Acid, Ammonium
Hydroxide, Sodium Disulfite (purity RPE-ACS). After introduction in the 
cells, the
rods were annealed under vacuum (p < 10􀀀4 mbar) at temperatures up to 
about 900 K
in order to clean their surfaces [8, 9]. Successive thermal cycles were 
also performed in a

hydrogen atmosphere below 1 bar."

He also went through a cell / rod H loading process which also seems doable:

"The sample loading in a natural hydrogen atmosphere was performed in 
successive
steps. In each step, we started with an initial gas pressure in the 
range 400–800 mbar
and thereafter a little amount of hydrogen was introduced into the cell 
through a suitable
valve (
p  400–600 mbar). When the pressure decreased down to its 
starting value, new
hydrogen was added (see fig. 3). After several loading cycles, the 
sample was ready and
it was possible to trigger the exothermic process. Such an operation can 
be performed
by lowering the input power, waiting for the sample temperature to 
decrease down to
about 300 K, then suddenly restoring the previous power level. After 
this operation an
increased equilibrium temperature, as shown in fig. 4, is obtained: the 
cell is producing
an excess heat. Another way to trigger the process is to provoke a 
pressure step-like
variation, as shown in fig. 5. After the triggering procedure, the 
production of excess heat

is maintained for months.

It must be underlined that, once the heat producing process has been 
started, the cells
are kept sealed for all the time, that is no H2 or anything else is 
introduced or extracted
from the cell, except heat, of course, while the input power is 
maintained constant. The
initial temperatures are newly obtained when the heat producing process 
is stopped by

following a suitable procedure (see fig. 5 and relative caption)."

Note there was no H supplied to the cell for 289 days and still Focardi 
and his team say the cell produced more heat that was being applied for 
289 days. To me this seems very doable to replicate. Why has no one 
replicated the device and reported on the results? This is not rocket 
science nor mega buck expensive nor using exotic materials nor requiring 
exotic processing.

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Thanks for the link and references. I can see I have a lot of reading to 
do. I it seems my replication efforts are for a Piantelli cell 
(according to his patent application) and not a Focardi cell?


I should be able to borrow the high vacuum and other pumps needed. My 
patent attorney, who is also interested in the replication, has 
considerable contacts around town. Neither of us are in it for money. We 
just want to make a working LENR reactor, so we can shove it up the back 
sides of a few people we know.



On 11/8/2011 5:11 PM, Peter Gluck wrote:

Dear Aussie Guy,

Have you studied thoroughly the two Piantelli patents- from 1995
and 2010? Have you read what I wrote about Piantelli on my blog? 
(adress in signature) He has built the cells.

You will need vacuum of 10 exp minus 5-6 Torrs, i.e  a tandem of
a diffusion and a turbomolecular vacuum pumps.

Peter

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Overall I do agree with you, especially as cell A was a Ni plated 
stainless rod and it produces more power than did the Ni plated Ni rod. 
However I do plan to replicate the original Piantelly / Focardi cell 
design as closely as I can and how they produced, processed and H loaded 
the Ni rods.


Once I have that data set, I will start trying other Ni samples, like 
your Ni pipe suggestion with internal heater (which I like) and the Ni 
powder.



On 11/8/2011 5:39 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:




- Original Nachricht 
Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat
An:  vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum:   08.11.2011 07:28
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication


I have read Focardi did heat treat the Ni rod, which I also intend to
do. I also understand there can be problems with the Ni rod becoming H
loaded and producing heat when there is no external heating applied. I
do note Focardi does show a vacuum supply that can be applied to the
cell and with his 300 watts of thermal heat, the rod would get quite hot
as in a vacuum, it's ability to radiate heat away would be reduced.

Here is a question I'm sure Vortex can answer a lot quicker and easier
than I can.

Assuming a 10mm dia Ni rod 50 mm long, inserted inside a high temp
ceramic coil form, which is wrapped with high temp wire and in a vacuum.
How much power would need to be applied to get the Ni rod to 500 deg C?
Is this possible or would I need to use a more exotic heat source? IE
how to get a Ni rod to 500 deg C in a vacuum without breaking my several
thousand dollar budget?


The reaction is probably a surface effect, it is unlikely that the hydrogen 
diffused deep into the nickel rod.

You could use a nickel pipe and place the heater inside. Very low power should 
be needed to heat it to 500°
in a vacuum. 500° is equivalent to red hot glowing iron, nothing 
special,commercial heaters are available.
Placing the heater inside should avoid parasitic thermal energy losses and 
improve the COP much (if there is any) and should make the proof much easier.
Dont understand why Focardi&  Piantelly  had not this thought, I think, this is 
rather obvious.
They always choose the most distant confusing and difficult way this makes me 
doubt about their seriousness.

Such an arrangement, but much smaller, is found in electronic vacuuum valves as 
cathode. They use a small nickel pipe (barium oxide coated) with the heater 
inside as a cathode.

Re: [Vo]:Some thoughts about preparation of nickel powder

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

This is very interesting. Thanks for sharing. Will soon be able to share 
our data as well. I also note mention of better results with 
electropolished Ni. Any comments on that?



On 11/8/2011 6:11 PM, kulintsov wrote:

Sorry, industrial secret, ZOG's pursuit, no comments.

By the way during my experimentation with electrolysis of the nickel 
salts I have seen small and short "gamma bursts" with my dosimeter 
several times. For a minute or two there was double, triple or even 
quadruple increase in background radiation after turning on and off 
the apparatus or after rapid change of concentration of the solution. 
But these measurements was too rough to be sure about it.


I think such thing aren't surprising for cold fusion experts.

Pasha

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Nice list you put together Peter. We will try to get all the papers and 
have them translated. It should not take too long for a patent attorney 
to obtain those papers or do have a source of them translated? If so 
care to share? You see, I don't like re-inventing the wheel and those 
papers should be well worth the read.


To me it would seem that Rossi and Focardi built the E-cat on the 
shoulders / backs of the authors of the published research papers below. 
Calling Rossi and in effect Focardi frauds is like calling every one of 
these researchers frauds. I'm with Jed. It is real. Get over it and 
spend your time figuring out how it works or at least try to replicate 
it. I'm sure, from what I have read, there are more than enough brains 
in Vortex to figure it out.


I make this promise. If I do get a LENR reaction to happen, I will make 
my workshop open to anyone (well with-in reason) who wants to come and 
have a play. No secrets. All open. Anything you do, measure or suggest 
to try is in the public domain.



PROF. FRANCESCO PIANTELLI- PUBLICATIONS AND PRESENTATIONs re Ni-H syatems.

In chronological order

[1]. F. Piantelli, Atti Accad. Fis., Serie XV, Tomo XII, pag. 89-96 (1993)

[2] S. Focardi, R. Habel and F. Piantelli, “Anomalous Heat Production in 
Ni-H Systems”, Nuovo Cim. Vol. 107 A, pp163-167, 1994


[3] Focardi S., Gabbani V., Habel R., Montalbano V., Piantelli F. and 
Veronesi S.,

"Status of Cold Fusion in Italy," Siena Workshop, Siena, 24-25 (March 1995

[4] S. Focardi, R.Habel and F.Piantelli: “Evidenza di reazioni nucleari 
in sistemi nichel-idrogeno a 400 gradi Celsius”, Congresso Nazionale 
della Società Italiana di fisica, Perugia. 2-7 ottobre 1995.


[5] S. Focardi, V.Gabbani. R. Habel. V. Montalbano, . F. Piantelli, G. 
Solvetti, A. Tombari, S. Veronese:: “Evidence of Heat Production and 
Nuclear reactions in Hydrogen Loaded Nickel Rods in Siena Experiments”. 
Convegno “Stato della fusione fredda in Italia” – Siena (1995)


[6[ Focardi S., Gabbani, V., Montalbano, V., Piantelli, F., and 
Veronesi, S., : "Analisi Superficiale Con Mocrosonda X Delle Barrette 
Metalliche Utilizzate Per La Produzione Anomala Di Energia Negli 
Esperimenti Di Siena ”Atti Acc. Fisiocritici Siena, Serie 15, Tomo 15, 
p. 109-115, (1996)


[7] S. Focardi, V. Gabbani, V. Montalbano, F/Piantelli, C. Stanghini, S. 
Veronesi: ”New Esperimental Evidance of Nuclear Reactions in Ni-H 
Systems” – LXXXI Congresso nazionale S.I.F. – Verona (1996)


[8] S. Focardi, V. Gabbani, V. Montalbano, F. Piantelli and S. Veronesi, 
“On the Ni-H System”, Asti Workshop in Hydrogen/Deuterium loaded Metals, 
pp 35-47, 1997.


[9] E. Campari, S. Focardi, V. Gabbani, R. Habel, V. Montalbano, 
F.Piantelli,, S. Veronesi, E.I. Usai – “Studio di sistemi Ni-H nella 
regione 600- 800 K,” Congresso Nazionale della Società Italiana di 
fisica, Como 27-31 ottobre 1997


[10] Focardi, S., Gabbani, V., Montalbano, V., Piantelli, F. and 
Veronesi, S.,:"Large Excess Heat Production in Ni-H Systems,"Nuovo 
Cimento, Vol. 111A, p. 1233-1242, (1998

http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/library/1998/1998FocardiS-LargeExcessHeatProductionNiH.pdf

[11] E.Campari, S.Focardi, V. Gabbani, V/ Momtalbano, F. Piantelli,E. S. 
Veronesi: “ Emissione di raggi gamma da sistemi Ni-H”,Congresso 
Nazionale della Società Italiana di fisica, Salerno 28 settembre-2 
ottobre 1998


[12] E.Campari, S.Focardi, V. Gabbani, V/ Momtalbano, F. Piantelli,E. S. 
Veronesi: “-Comportamento dei sistemi Ni-H” Congresso Nazionale della 
Società Italiana di fisica,Pavia 20-24 settembre 1999


[13] A. Battaglia, L. Daddi, S. Focardi, V. Gabbani, V.Montalbano, F. 
Piantelli, P. G. Sona and S. Veronesi, “Neutron emission in Ni.H 
systems”, Nuovo Cim. Vol. 112A, pp 921-9311, 1999

http://www.newenergytimes.com/v2/library/1999/1999BattagliaA-NeutronEmissionNiH.pdf

[14] S. Focardi, V. Gabbani, V. Montalbano, F. Piantelli, S. Veronesi, 
“On the Ni-H System”. Conference Proceedings vol 64, “Asti Workshop on 
Anomalies in Hydrogen/Deuterium loaded metals”, 1999, W.J.M.F.Collis Editor


[15] S. Focardi, V. Gabbani,V. Montalbano, F. Piantelli, S. Veronesi:“ 
Gamma emission from Ni-H Systems at 420-750 K”Atti Accad. Fisiocritici, 
Serie XV, Tomo XVIII, (1999) pags 109-118


[16] E. G. Campari, S. Focardi, V. Gabbiani, V. Montalbano. F. 
Piantelli, E. Porcu, E. Tosti, S. Veronesi: “Ni--H systems”, Proceedings 
of the 8th International Conference on Cold Fusion, Lerici (La Spezia), 
Italy 21-26 May 2000, pp 69-74


[17] Focardi, S. and Piantelli, F."Produzione Di Energia E Reazioni 
Nucleari In Sistemi Ni-H A 400 C" XIX Congresso Nazionale UIT, 2000+?


[18] E. Campari, S.Focardi, V. Gabbani, V. Montalbano, F. Piantelli,

E. Sali, C. Stanghini, E.S. Veronesi: “Alcuni aspetti delle interazioni 
Ni-H”,Congresso Nazionale della Società Italiana di fisica,Palermo 6-11 
ottobre 2000.


[19] E. G. Campari, S. Focardi, V. Gabbani, V. Montalbano, F. Piantelli, 
S. Veronesi,”Thermal Surface effects in Hy

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Yes, thanks to you Peter, I do now understand the Ni-H cell design is 
Piantelli. Before I start changing anything, I will attempt to replicate 
his design as described in the Focardi and Piantelli paper in 1998 and 
in the Piantelli patent. I'm an old and cautious engineer, who has 
learned not to jump to quick conclusions and does not like re-inventing 
the wheel unless absolutely necessary.


I may end up blowing my budget and I suspect a bit more but this excites 
me and I'm really good at picking out the grains of gold from a lot of 
information from many sources. I also have an almost pictorial memory 
and I'm really good at mental visualization and manipulation of complex 
systems. I'm excited to do this even if what I end up with is light 
years behind Rossi and others. If I can make a low cost, low power, 
safe, reliable and simple to build Ni-H LENR device, I'll be a very 
happy man.



On 11/8/2011 7:33 PM, Peter Gluck wrote:

Be aware that it is a Piantelli cell and that many blokes worldwide
are trying replications- and this actions would lead to many variants 
of practical energy sources. I wish you sucess!

Peter

[Vo]:Focardi on TED and photos of very early Rossi reactors

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Dr. Focardi talking in Italian on TED. 
http://tedxtalks.ted.com/video/TEDxBologna-Sergio-Focardi-LE-c There is 
a nice shot of a early prototype E-Cat reactor sitting in a red plastic 
bucket, during his presentation plus a few more, which gives me a lot of 
hope to replicate a Piantelli LENR cell sitting in a fish tank.


AG

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I do like the idea of the Ni tube and putting the heater element inside 
for all the reasons you listed. This could result in a very simple to 
make cell as thermal heat, H2 and vacuum only needs to be applied to the 
inside of the tube. Using a stainless tube with Ni electroplated and 
electropolished on the inside could result in a nice compact design with 
little external corrosion potential. Maybe fit a collar type finned heat 
around the outside of the tube 
(http://www.aavidthermalloy.com/products/standard/320105b0g sort of 
like this but longer) to make thermal transfer to passing fluid very 
efficient. Also make the heat sink streamlined and optimised for fluid. 
I like it. Maybe call it the Vortex cell?


Why did they design the Piantelli cell the way they did? Maybe because 
they are not experienced engineers with grease under their fingernails 
and a lot of time at the "Coal Face" where necessity is the mother of 
invention??


As for the other replicators, may I suggest they did not have Vortex to 
call upon?


AG

On 11/8/2011 10:04 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

A nice idea could also be: Use a nickel tube and apply heat as well as hydrogen 
/inside/ of the tube.
If there are any gamma rays or particles that trigger other reactions, the 
efficiency should be better.
Also parasitic heat losses are minimized, because the hottest surface is inside.
Also preparation (glowing in vacuum) should be easier.

I dont understand the idea behind the Piantelli-Focardi design of apparatus.
It seems to be inefficient to me and difficult to measure.

It must also been said, many have tried to replicate it, so far I know Fiat
and some universities are among them.
One group reported, they have observed all effects that Focardi&  Piantelli 
have reported,
but could not measure excess heat.
Dont know, if they reported gamma rays.

If you do a precise replication, expect it to be difficult and possibly without 
result because
many have already tried.

Peter

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I'm on my 2nd read of the Piantelli patent application WO 2010/058288 
Al. I'm starting to understand the nuclear process he is describing. Is 
this for real? To me it seems logical and simple to understand but then 
I'm not a physicists. Has this nuclear fusion like exchange of 
Piantelli's been peer reviewed? If so can you please provide a link to 
the paper or the paper itself?


My learning curve is really starting to accelerate but I fear I'm still 
very much like a novice vulcanologist without an asbestos suit to shield 
me from the flames!


AG

On 11/9/2011 12:21 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:




- Original Nachricht ----
Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat
An:  vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum:   08.11.2011 13:21
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication


I do like the idea of the Ni tube and putting the heater element inside
for all the reasons you listed. This could result in a very simple to
make cell as thermal heat, H2 and vacuum only needs to be applied to the
inside of the tube. Using a stainless tube with Ni electroplated and
electropolished on the inside could result in a nice compact design with
little external corrosion potential. Maybe fit a collar type finned heat
around the outside of the tube
(http://www.aavidthermalloy.com/products/standard/320105b0g sort of
like this but longer) to make thermal transfer to passing fluid very
efficient. Also make the heat sink streamlined and optimised for fluid.
I like it. Maybe call it the Vortex cell?

If you do it, name it as you want, it is your cell.
If you overtrump Rossi and enable some 100 other persons to replicate it your
success is sure ;-). This cake is too big for one ;-)

I would like to try stuff like this, but I dont have the equipment and working 
space needed.

Why did they design the Piantelli cell the way they did? Maybe because
they are not experienced engineers with grease under their fingernails
and a lot of time at the "Coal Face" where necessity is the mother of
invention??


The reason might be this: Piantelli is a biophysicist and he did other research,
when excess heat was observed.
So the cell was not originally designed for this.
So far I read Piantelli later favored his cancer research and stopped the 
energy research.
Possibly he was never too much interested in energy and wanted to develop a 
gamma source originally.


As for the other replicators, may I suggest they did not have Vortex to
call upon?

Hehe.

Peter


AG

On 11/8/2011 10:04 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

A nice idea could also be: Use a nickel tube and apply heat as well as

hydrogen /inside/ of the tube.

If there are any gamma rays or particles that trigger other reactions, the

efficiency should be better.

Also parasitic heat losses are minimized, because the hottest surface is

inside.

Also preparation (glowing in vacuum) should be easier.

I dont understand the idea behind the Piantelli-Focardi design of

apparatus.

It seems to be inefficient to me and difficult to measure.

It must also been said, many have tried to replicate it, so far I know

Fiat

and some universities are among them.
One group reported, they have observed all effects that Focardi&

Piantelli have reported,

but could not measure excess heat.
Dont know, if they reported gamma rays.

If you do a precise replication, expect it to be difficult and possibly

without result because

many have already tried.

Peter

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

As I soon (4 to 8 weeks) will hopefully be doing my own calorimeter 
measurements, Robert will you please assist my learning curve by 
pointing how the 6 Oct E-Cat thermocouple input and output heat 
exchanger measuring points were incorrect and how they should have been 
done properly so I don't make a similar mistake.


AG


On 11/9/2011 12:50 AM, Robert Leguillon wrote:

By assuming that all of the water pumped in was evaporated. Unfortunately, it 
was fed into the steam condensers and back into the E-Cat in a closed loop. 
This us why the October 6th test was so important. It stood the chance to 
produce viable calorimetry. Unfortunately, the placement of the secondary 
thermocouples bring the results into question

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

These is a very descriptive write of of the Piantelli process in the 
patent application I referenced. Link here: 
http://www.wipo.int/patentscope/search/en/detail.jsf?docId=WO2010058288&recNum=1&docAn=IB2009007549&queryString=ALLNAMES:%28piantelli%29&maxRec=1


Is this the latest?

AG

On 11/9/2011 1:05 AM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:




- Original Nachricht 
Von:     Aussie Guy E-Cat
An:  vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum:   08.11.2011 15:17
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication


I'm on my 2nd read of the Piantelli patent application WO 2010/058288
Al. I'm starting to understand the nuclear process he is describing. Is
this for real? To me it seems logical and simple to understand but then
I'm not a physicists. Has this nuclear fusion like exchange of
Piantelli's been peer reviewed? If so can you please provide a link to
the paper or the paper itself?


I must say, I am absolutely not involved in nuclear physics. Know only the very 
basics.
So I am no one who could give advice.
NASA has investigated the Piantelli research and they favorize the so called "Widom 
Larsen" theory.
Easy to find, but others could give you direct pointers. I must search myself.

Rossi does strictly deny the Widom Larsen theory.
Possibly his reason is, because this was made by a competitor.
He is not a scientist and does not think like a scientist.
I think there is currently no LENR theory that is fully acknowledged by 
mainsteam physicists.
The Piantelli group has announced to release a theory that is not in conflict 
with existing physics.
So far I know, they want to do this in 1st quarter 2012, but who knows, if it 
will happen.

Best, Peter

Re: [Vo]:Focardi 1998 cell replication

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Thank you Axil, that is my understanding as well and explained much 
better than I could. I have been told that Piantelli has confirmed each 
step is correct.


AG

On 11/9/2011 3:52 AM, Axil Axil wrote:


**

*"Hydrogen Ions are protons and are positively charged."*

**

**

*The Piantelli theory is based on a quasiparticle: a 
_/negative/_hydrogen ion that acts as an electron in the nucleus of a 
nickel atom. *


**

*In a nutshell according to the the Piantelli theory, the negative 
hydrogen ion enters the orbit of the nickel atom as an electron would 
and because it is so heavy being composed of two electrons and a 
proton. This heavy multi sub atomic particle _/quasiparticle/_will 
approach the nucleus of the nickel atom very closely in the same way 
that a negatively charged muon would in Muon-catalyzed fusion (μCF). *


**

*The cross section of fusion between the negative hydrogen ion and the 
nucleus of the nickel atom is large because the very heavy negative 
hydrogen ion orbits so closely to the nucleus of the nickel atom.*

**
*best regards,*
**
*Axil*

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Some more inside shots

http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3295952.ece/BINARY/w468/kall_fusion_rossi_sprattad_lada_1_468_320.jpg

http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3295953.ece/BINARY/w468/kall_fusion_rossi_sprattad_lada_468_320.jpghttp://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3295953.ece/BINARY/w468/kall_fusion_rossi_sprattad_lada_468_320.jpg

AG

On 11/9/2011 9:06 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:

On Tue, Nov 8, 2011 at 3:39 PM, Horace Heffner  wrote:


Just to be clear, they say they saw inside the 30x30x30 cm inside box in the
6 Oct E-cat demo?  Do you have a reference on this?

http://www.radio24.ilsole24ore.com/Foto/articoli/ecat071011-3.jpg

Source:

http://www.radio24.ilsole24ore.com/main.php?articolo=ecat-fusione-fedda-bologna-andrea-rossi

T

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Yes it looks a mess but just created a lot more energy than was 
inputted, so fair go. As for the fin design, I could do better 40 years 
ago. I mean the water enters in the lower left corner at the bottom and 
the steam exits at the upper right on the top. I assume the rate of 
water flow through that box is slow and if so the fin orientation is not 
that important. Still it would not be hard to do a better job, he says 
inside a fire proof suit having yet to build and then to get working a 
LENR device ;)


This E-Cat is like a very early model T prototype. It works but boy is 
there a lot that can be done to reduce cost and improve performance, 
which is exactly what a engineering in a hurry would have built.


AG


On 11/9/2011 12:18 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Aussie Guy E-Cat <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Some more inside shots


http://www.nyteknik.se/incoming/article3295952.ece/BINARY/w468/kall_fusion_rossi_sprattad_lada_1_468_320.jpg


That's a good photo.

Boy, what a mess! It looks like an old automobile radiator. It must 
have been run for a hundred hours.

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I have spent some time on working out what is what in the Exposed E-Cat 
photos.


What can be seen is boiler scale on the reactor heat radiation fins, 
external conduits and assembly bolts which seems to indicate water and 
steam occur in the outer box as the Higgins drawing suggests and not 
inside the reactor core as you suggest.


The steam outlet from the outer box is via a fitting on the top and not 
from the reactor core as you suggest.


This would suggest the water input is to the outer box (inlet fitting on 
the bottom lower front left and not from the side as the Higgins 
drawings suggests) and there is no water inside the smaller finned 
reactor core. See attached photo.


From what I can see there are 3 conduits connections into the reactor 
core to supply H, heater power and RF energy.


Based on my measurements of the photos and assuming a symmetrical 
reactor core design, there is room for the fins on the bottom of the 
reactor core as Higgins suggests.


AG

On 11/9/2011 4:53 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
Well I got some sleep and am catching up on this thread.   I am very 
disappointed.  The confusion here is incredible.  It also appears no 
one has read my paper at all:


http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

especially the sections "T2 THERMOCOUPLE LOCATION" and "VOLUME 
CALCULATIONS", wherein I analyze the photos, Photo 1 and Photo 2 in my 
paper, which for some reason everyone confuses as showing the inside 
of the "30x30x30 cm inside box" that supposedly houses one to three 1 
cm thick reactors (or 3 cm thick reactors if you please, Rossi made 
both statements), and to which I referred when I said no one saw 
inside it at the demo.   I was *not* referring to the roughly 50x60x35 
cm *exterior* box.  The posters on this for some reason seem to 
confuse the two boxes.  Jed calls the 30x30x30 cm inside box the 
"reactor", though it clearly is much more than "the reactor".  It is a 
reactor housing that supposedly keeps the reactor dry and protected, 
and to which 1 /4 inch and 1 inch water sealed conduit pipes connect 
which carry water, main power, and the "frequency generator" power 
from the outside to the stuff inside the box.


The material I have analyzed fits inside the 30x30x30 cm box. The 
50x60x35 cm exterior box to which others refer is irrelevant, except 
when water levels and temperatures are simulated.


It is disappointing that people would think I have not even seen the 
photos I so carefully analyzed and described in my paper. This 
reinforces the feeling I have had that this is all a waste of time.


Here are the important facts:

1. No one at the 6 Oct demo saw inside the 30x30x30 cm box.  It was 
not opened.


2. Mats Lewan did not see any features of the box aside from what was 
shown in the various photos.  He did not see any exterior structures 
that might be important, such as
holes, vents, fins underneath, etc. The only features visible were the 
bolted flanges and the pipe feed throughs.


3. The small interior 30x30x30 box was bolted to the bottom of the 
exterior box.  It is thus unlikely a set of fins like those on top are 
present on the bottom of the 30x30x30 cm box.


4. No one would have been able to observe cement, ceramic tiles, fire 
brick, iron slabs, lead slabs, Ni containers, valves, wiring, hidden 
water access ports, etc., because the inside box was not opened.


5. The inside and outside boxes, and the contents of the inside box, 
together weigh 98 kg.  Clearly the inside and outside boxes, pipes and 
bolts that are visible do not weigh anything like 98 kg.  The boxes 
are made of sheet metal. Therefore the density of the 30x30x30 cm box 
and its interior contents is very high.


I am attempting to construct my simulation within these constraints.

I think Bob Higgen's diagram at:

http://lenr.qumbu.com/rossi_ecat_oct11_a.php

is inaccurate. The reactor is enclosed inside the 30x30x30 cm interior 
box.  The fins are not as big as shown.  There is only one set of 
fins, on top.  The thermocouple is much longer than shown and likely 
rests against the edge of the inside box, and probably on the flanges 
of the inside box, which are not shown.  The gaps between the inside 
box and the edges of the outside box are too large in proportion.  The 
50x60x35 cm exterior box dimensions include the flanges to which the 
top panel is bolted. This only leaves a few centimeters gap (5 cm on 
the ends, 3 cm on the sides, excluding the flanges) between the inside 
box and the outside box. See the sections of my paper referenced 
above.  I should note here that I am working on an update of those 
sections based on an improved photo analysis.


Here are my best numbers so far:

Width of E-cat inside box:  30.3 cm
Interior width of E-cat outside box, flange to flange: 49.6 cm
Interior width of E-cat outside box, side to side : 40.6 cm
Interior length of E-cat outside box: = 46.3 cm

Best regards,

Horace Heffner
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Mate I'm not a physicists or an antagonists. Just a very practical old 
power systems engineer. You have come up with a exotic theory of scam 
that requires you to prove it. If I say I doubt your theory, that is my 
right and you have no right to say "Nonsense" cause you have absolutely 
no proof of what you suggest is even remotely true.


As a point of interest do you accept the significant and long term 
reports of excess heat generation in Ni-H LENR cells? If not why? If yes 
then why do you doubt Rossi?


AG

On 11/9/2011 5:39 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:


On Nov 8, 2011, at 9:52 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:

I have spent some time on working out what is what in the Exposed 
E-Cat photos.


What can be seen is boiler scale on the reactor heat radiation fins, 
external conduits and assembly bolts which seems to indicate water 
and steam occur in the outer box as the Higgins drawing suggests and 
not inside the reactor core as you suggest.


Nonsense!

That water and steam are present in the outside box has never been in 
doubt by anyone that I know of. What I suggested is the possibility 
ports can be opened to the inside box to permit timed and limited 
water exposure to selected slabs of material, and the resulting steam 
emissions.  The source and destination of the water/steam is of course 
the outside box, and then the top vent.  You assertion that you can 
determine whether or not this occurs from the photos is the nonsense.





The steam outlet from the outer box is via a fitting on the top and 
not from the reactor core as you suggest.


You must think I am and idiot to say such a thing about me. Did you 
not read my estimates of the location of the port in my photo analysis?


http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

Do you think I am unaware of the T fitting in the top of the outer box 
through which the thermocouple also is fitted, the location of which I 
determined by photo analysis?





This would suggest the water input is to the outer box (inlet fitting 
on the bottom lower front left and not from the side as the Higgins 
drawings suggests)


Well of course there is a water inlet on the outside box, on the left 
front.



and there is no water inside the smaller finned reactor core.


This you have no way of knowing.



See attached photo.

From what I can see there are 3 conduits connections into the reactor 
core to supply H, heater power and RF energy.


There are actually four: 1 water, 1 gas, 2 for "frequency generator" 
input.


Based on my measurements of the photos and assuming a symmetrical 
reactor core design, there is room for the fins on the bottom of the 
reactor core as Higgins suggests.


Of course there is room.  The problem is the fins were not observed 
there by Mats Lewan who had extensive access at the demo being discussed.




AG

On 11/9/2011 4:53 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
Well I got some sleep and am catching up on this thread.   I am very 
disappointed.  The confusion here is incredible.  It also appears no 
one has read my paper at all:


http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

especially the sections "T2 THERMOCOUPLE LOCATION" and "VOLUME 
CALCULATIONS", wherein I analyze the photos, Photo 1 and Photo 2 in 
my paper, which for some reason everyone confuses as showing the 
inside of the "30x30x30 cm inside box" that supposedly houses one to 
three 1 cm thick reactors (or 3 cm thick reactors if you please, 
Rossi made both statements), and to which I referred when I said no 
one saw inside it at the demo.   I was *not* referring to the 
roughly 50x60x35 cm *exterior* box.  The posters on this for some 
reason seem to confuse the two boxes.  Jed calls the 30x30x30 cm 
inside box the "reactor", though it clearly is much more than "the 
reactor".  It is a reactor housing that supposedly keeps the reactor 
dry and protected, and to which 1 /4 inch and 1 inch water sealed 
conduit pipes connect which carry water, main power, and the 
"frequency generator" power from the outside to the stuff inside the 
box.


The material I have analyzed fits inside the 30x30x30 cm box. The 
50x60x35 cm exterior box to which others refer is irrelevant, except 
when water levels and temperatures are simulated.


It is disappointing that people would think I have not even seen the 
photos I so carefully analyzed and described in my paper. This 
reinforces the feeling I have had that this is all a waste of time.


Here are the important facts:

1. No one at the 6 Oct demo saw inside the 30x30x30 cm box.  It was 
not opened.


2. Mats Lewan did not see any features of the box aside from what 
was shown in the various photos.  He did not see any exterior 
structures that might be important, such as
holes, vents, fins underneath, etc. The only features visible were 
the bolted flanges and the pipe feed throughs.


3. The small interior 30x30x30 box was bolted to the b

Re: [Vo]:Krivit names some Rossi "customer" names

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Krivit produced no references for his statements. And you would believe 
him why? Especially which his very public anti Rossi stance, which I 
believe is not justified by anything Krivit had or has not published. 
Just by 2 pence worth. Maybe time to pass the buttered popcorn?


I'm pro Rossi's E-Cat does work, just to go on record. Why? Because it 
looks like something I would build if I was in a big hurry (well I would 
have done a better job on the heat exchanger) and all the Italian Ni-H 
research papers, especially that of Piantelli and a few private discussions.


AG


On 11/9/2011 5:48 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:



http://blog.newenergytimes.com/2011/11/09/poor-journalism-by-wired-u-k-on-rossi-story/ 

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I will read your information. I do apologize for assuming you were a 
LENR denier. But mate, values in the inside box to do a fraud? Maybe a 
bit much.


AG


On 11/9/2011 7:21 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:


On Nov 8, 2011, at 10:35 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:

Mate I'm not a physicists or an antagonists. Just a very practical 
old power systems engineer. You have come up with a exotic theory of 
scam that requires you to prove it.


Not true.  It is not I who is making the claims.  I merely intend to 
show some of the arguments put forth here that the data provided 
indicate Rossi's clamis "have to be real" are false.  If the data can 
be reproduced with a device which produces no nuclear energy, whether 
that device actually exists or not, then it should be pretty obvious 
the data does not support Rossi's claims. I am advocating for better 
testing procedures. The actual existence or not of my simulated device 
is irrelevant. The important point is the quality of the data.  I made 
suggestions in my report for specific ways to improve the quality of 
the data.  I am not alone in this.  Many other people have suggested 
numerous similar things over recent months.  Rossi's behavior is 
potentially seriously damaging the future of LENR research and the 
future of billions of people. I think it is important to speak out 
about this.




If I say I doubt your theory, that is my right and you have no right 
to say "Nonsense" cause you have absolutely no proof of what you 
suggest is even remotely true.



I have the right. In fact exercised it. 8^)  Your statement made no 
sense at all.  You wrote: "... water steam occur in the outer box as 
the Higgins drawing suggests and not inside the reactor core as you 
suggest." The observation that "... water steam occur in the outer 
box..." does not preclude in any way that water and steam can occur in 
the inner box under limited control.  You made an erroneous inference, 
a logic error. It makes no sense. You also grossly underestimate my 
understanding of the structure of the E-cat in question.







As a point of interest do you accept the significant and long term 
reports of excess heat generation in Ni-H LENR cells?


If you knew anything of my history, or looked at my web site, you 
would know I am an LENR advocate and experimenter, and that I accept 
that some experimental reports of light water excess heat are likely 
correct.  I have done some experimenting myself and put forth some 
amateur theories:


http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/dfRpt
http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/DeflationFusion.pdf


The question in my mind is not whether LENR exists, but rather whether 
any evidence exits at all that supports Rossi's claims of commercially 
viable nuclear energy production. These are two very different things.




If not why? If yes then why do you doubt Rossi?


I see Rossi as potentially the biggest threat to the field that has 
ever come along.  I also think I made fairly clear in my data review 
my position with regard to the 6 October 2011 test I have been 
addressing of late:


http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

I think it was the best of the tests so far, but still obviously 
inconclusive.





AG

On 11/9/2011 5:39 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:


On Nov 8, 2011, at 9:52 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:

I have spent some time on working out what is what in the Exposed 
E-Cat photos.


What can be seen is boiler scale on the reactor heat radiation 
fins, external conduits and assembly bolts which seems to indicate 
water and steam occur in the outer box as the Higgins drawing 
suggests and not inside the reactor core as you suggest.


Nonsense!

That water and steam are present in the outside box has never been 
in doubt by anyone that I know of. What I suggested is the 
possibility ports can be opened to the inside box to permit timed 
and limited water exposure to selected slabs of material, and the 
resulting steam emissions.  The source and destination of the 
water/steam is of course the outside box, and then the top vent.  
You assertion that you can determine whether or not this occurs from 
the photos is the nonsense.





The steam outlet from the outer box is via a fitting on the top and 
not from the reactor core as you suggest.


You must think I am and idiot to say such a thing about me. Did you 
not read my estimates of the location of the port in my photo analysis?


http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

Do you think I am unaware of the T fitting in the top of the outer 
box through which the thermocouple also is fitted, the location of 
which I determined by photo analysis?





This would suggest the water input is to the outer box (inlet 
fitting on the bottom lower front left and not from the side as the 
Higgins drawings suggests)


Well of course there is a water inlet

Re: [Vo]:Control Mechanism

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Rossi has said that each of the 107 E-Cat reactor boxes in the 1 MW demo 
had a individual control system. Running in self sustain mode, with the 
heater not being activated, the only other wires going into the reactor 
box are those called RF as per the attachment. One would then assume 
these wires have something to do with controlling the reactor in self 
sustain mode.


I also note that Fe was found in the analysed fuel sample. Was the Fe a 
ferrite powder and does Rossi use the RF wires to apply low frequency EM 
induction to the Fe / ferrite powder to somehow assist control of the 
speed / gain / of the reactor when running in self sustain mode?


I see the E-Cat as a sort of a amplified on the verge of breaking into 
oscillation where in self sustain mode, with a output heat energy 
feedback into the input, gain must somehow be closely controlled less 
you get oscillation, while in heater applied mode, control is much 
easier as you can control the input heat via the heater energy.


Maybe the Fe and the "RF" assist the self sustained mode control? 
Ferrites when moving up and down their BH curves do undergo slight 
physical dimensional changes. Can these ferrite shape changes cause the 
Ni nano powder, which I assume packs very densely, to alter the number 
of Ni atoms that are available to the H- ions? Assuming the Fe is a 
ferrite and it has a high permeability, this could create a lot of 
localized micro magnetic fields inside the packed Ni nano powder.


I also note that Rossi said the genset was running because of safety. 
Did he mean that if one of the E-Cats, running in high gain self sustain 
mode got out of control, he would then drop the reactor gain, dropping 
them out of self sustain mode and switch back to heater mode to regain 
control of all the E-Cats?


Somehow Rossi seems to be able to control the gain of the reaction and 
in heater mode run at a lower reactor gain with external heat applied 
(more safety as he seems to imply) and when self sustain mode is 
required, which he does not seem to like, (maybe he has seen 1 too many 
reactor melt downs) boost the gain so as to use the generated heat as 
input to the reaction but at the risk of a run away reactor.


Rossi did say that the reason he limited the 1 MW visitors to 2 was 
because of the time it would take to evacuate the reactor room if 
something went wrong. I do suggest Rossi has seen these reactors go very 
wrong and was generally worried about visitor safety.


Just some thoughts from down under.

AG


On 11/10/2011 2:51 AM, Jeff Sutton wrote:
Hello.  I have been following Rossi and the posts since the beginning 
and am very fascinated.
Rather than a fraud, I believe Rossi is on to something incrementally 
better than those that came before.  He has more success starting the 
reaction, however I think he has little control over it once started
To that supposition, can others comment on how they believe control 
exists?  (For discussion purpose, please suspend any thoughts that it 
is a scam.)


 1. Rossi, with all his comments, seems to suggest that it takes time
to heat up the ecat to get things started, however from the
demonstrations, they do not seem to have started in any scheduled
way.  He does, however, seem to get the ecat started within a few
hours give or take so that is fantastic.
 2. He has shown it in "self-sustaining" mode but always shuts it down
after a few hours with some excuse.  Why does he do that when the
blockbuster note would be "the ecat just keeps on going."  I
suggest this must mean that the ecat cannot just keep on running
for 6 months has he notes; at least in self-sustaining mode.  and
if not in self-sustain mode, then what does he do to "reset" the
reactor?  Use his heating element?  that makes no sense.  Add
Hydrogen?  Again that makes no sense as he could put a regulator
on this and do such automatically.  What resets the operation?
 3. He noted in the 2nd to last demo that he had a frequency generator
and it had been hidden all along, but in the last demo he notes
there isn't one.  Does this suggest that he was trying something
new to help in start up or make it run longer?  Or was this
mis-direction?  Where was this device or wires for it in previous
tests?
 4. How does he control the reaction?  His only control seems to be
the heating element and the flow of water over the reactor.  But
in all experiments, until quenching, the water flow seemed to be
constant.  And one generating "substantial" heat, clearly
controlling the reaction with a heating element very unlikely.  
Is contol simply due to the pre-start conditions (the amount of

hydrogen, nickel, geometry) and it runs "out of control" for a few
hours?

Any advice on how the control works would be most interesting.

In any event, forget all the nonsense with his lousy engineering 
design and terrible business skills; few are good at all 

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Dave you have made some good points and I will do as you suggest.

AG

On 11/10/2011 3:07 AM, David Roberson wrote:
AG, I think that  Horace is giving it a good effort to come up with a 
scheme to prove it is possible to simulate Rossi's results.  That is 
OK as Rossi has done everything within his ability to confuse the data 
and leave himself open to serious doubt.  I suspect that it is not a 
coincidence where the output power thermocouple was located.  If Rossi 
had allowed us to have accurate output data, I could have reverse 
engineered his ECAT quite well.  There are others who would wish to 
duplicate his device and produce them, but that is not my intent.  As 
an example, I am confident that there exists a well defined function 
of vapor output power versus ECAT temperature reading T2.  With this 
information, it would be simple to calculate the exact power output at 
every point in time and thus the true COP.  Rossi must have this 
relationship in order to conduct his testing of individual modules.  
Even the power up sequence he uses is part of his testing.  I have 
conducted a number of reviews of the data supplied during the October 
6 test and can see his intent.  I suggest that you look over a the 
detailed, smooth graph of T2 versus Time using all of the data 
points.  If you do, you will see a treasure trove of data to mine.

Dave

-Original Message-
From: Aussie Guy E-Cat 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Nov 9, 2011 5:14 am
Subject: Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

I will read your information. I do apologize for assuming you were a
LENR denier. But mate, values in the inside box to do a fraud? Maybe a
bit much.

AG


On 11/9/2011 7:21 PM, Horace Heffner wrote:
>
>  On Nov 8, 2011, at 10:35 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
>
>>  Mate I'm not a physicists or an antagonists. Just a very practical
>>  old power systems engineer. You have come up with a exotic theory of
>>  scam that requires you to prove it.
>
>  Not true.  It is not I who is making the claims.  I merely intend to
>  show some of the arguments put forth here that the data provided
>  indicate Rossi's clamis "have to be real" are false.  If the data can
>  be reproduced with a device which produces no nuclear energy, whether
>  that device actually exists or not, then it should be pretty obvious
>  the data does not support Rossi's claims. I am advocating for better
>  testing procedures. The actual existence or not of my simulated device
>  is irrelevant. The important point is the quality of the data.  I made
>  suggestions in my report for specific ways to improve the quality of
>  the data.  I am not alone in this.  Many other people have suggested
>  numerous similar things over recent months.  Rossi's behavior is
>  potentially seriously damaging the future of LENR research and the
>  future of billions of people. I think it is important to speak out
>  about this.
>
>
>
>>  If I say I doubt your theory, that is my right and you have no right
>>  to say "Nonsense" cause you have absolutely no proof of what you
>>  suggest is even remotely true.
>
>
>  I have the right. In fact exercised it. 8^)  Your statement made no
>  sense at all.  You wrote: "... water steam occur in the outer box as
>  the Higgins drawing suggests and not inside the reactor core as you
>  suggest." The observation that "... water steam occur in the outer
>  box..." does not preclude in any way that water and steam can occur in
>  the inner box under limited control.  You made an erroneous inference,
>  a logic error. It makes no sense. You also grossly underestimate my
>  understanding of the structure of the E-cat in question.
>
>
>
>
>>
>>  As a point of interest do you accept the significant and long term
>>  reports of excess heat generation in Ni-H LENR cells?
>
>  If you knew anything of my history, or looked at my web site, you
>  would know I am an LENR advocate and experimenter, and that I accept
>  that some experimental reports of light water excess heat are likely
>  correct.  I have done some experimenting myself and put forth some
>  amateur theories:
>
>  http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf  
<http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/CFnuclearReactions.pdf>
>  http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/dfRpt  
<http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/dfRpt>
>  http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/DeflationFusion.pdf  
<http://www.mtaonline.net/%7Ehheffner/DeflationFusion.pdf>
>
>
>  The question in my mind is not whether LENR exists, but rather whether
>  any evidence exits at all that supports Rossi's claims of commercially
>  viable nuclear energy production. These are two very different things.
>
>
>>  If not why? If ye

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I might suggest that the 2 "RF" wires maybe multicore shielded cable. If 
it was just 2 wires, why would Rossi need 2 penetration in the outer and 
inner box? Way too many holes to seal against leaks. One cable may be 
input and the other output, which are separated into 2 cables to reduce 
cross talk in the reactor's control circuits?


Rossi does refer to his reactor as an "Amplifier" and every amplifier I 
know or have designed needs gain control and uses feedback. He has said 
each E-Cat module has it's own control and that the control panel was 
mounted on the outside of the container as it got too hot inside. Was 
there a control panel mounted on the off camera side of the container? 
If so does anyone have photos of the control panel?


AG


On 11/10/2011 9:18 AM, Horace Heffner wrote:
First let me correct an earlier statement in this thread.  In regards 
to the pipe conduits to the interior box from the front of the outer 
box I said: "There are actually four: 1 water, 1 gas, 2 for "frequency 
generator" input."


That was meant to say: "There are actually four: 1 gas, 1 main power, 
and 2 for "frequency generator" input."  I think it is especially odd 
that the two "frequency generator" conduits, one above the interior 
box flanges, one below, are 1 1/4 inch pipe, while the conduit for the 
main power is only 1" pipe. It seems reasonable to speculate as to 
what might require, and be located inside, the large pipes.



On Nov 9, 2011, at 10:35 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:


2011/11/9 Horace Heffner :
The material I have analyzed fits inside the 30x30x30 cm box. The 
50x60x35

cm exterior box to which others refer is irrelevant, except when water
levels and temperatures are simulated.





I am responding to this post only because words I did not issue have 
been put in my mouth.



If you think that there is a 30×30×30 cm³ black box


"Black" is your wording, not mine, in relation to color.  Those 
dimensions came from Mats Lewan's report which I reference in my paper:


http://www.mtaonline.net/~hheffner/Rossi6Oct2011Review.pdf

I also determined from the photos that the actual dimension is closer 
to 30.3 cm.  Any reference to a "black box" I might have made in my 
writing was not literal, but I don't recall referring to the interior 
box as "black". The color might be called rusty dirty scale deposited 
on aluminum.




(it was not mine
impression, but my impression is based on indirect conclusion made
that I do not remember anyone saying seen such a large black box
inside),


If you had read my paper you would have seen a photograph appended of 
the 30x30x30 cm interior box, with sealed pipe fittings going into it 
from the front of the larger box.




and you think that Rossi is an evil criminal and fraudster,


I did not at any time say that.  Those are your words, not mine.  It 
is you who repeatedly jumps to the fraud conclusion, not me.  Fraud or 
self delusion are of course possibilities I recognize, as do many 
others, especially given Rossi's inability numerous times to provide 
anything other than highly flawed calorimetry data, or refusal to 
admit the importance of such mundane scientific concepts as controls, 
etc.  The lives of billions of people are affected by Rossi's actions 
now, regardless the outcome.  Why will he never make the tiny 
incremental effort required to properly demonstrate he produces 
nuclear heat?  If he does not give a damn about the rest of the world, 
only his marketing strategy, then that indeed does not speak highly of 
his morality, does it?  His bizarre behavior raises logical 
questions.  Has he no faith in himself to produce his claimed 
results?  Has his discovery gone the way of Patterson's beads?  Are 
his results now merely amplified artifacts, or insufficient to be 
commercially viable?   Is he unable to run for multiple days, much 
less multiple months as claimed?  Only Rossi himself is responsible 
for creating these doubts.


What I *would* be happy to do is show the possibility that a logical 
construction can produce the observed results.  Given the 37% extra 
output heat that I mistakenly built into my spread sheet by biasing 
the temperature, it does not take an unfeasible error in the Tout 
reading to accommodate a good match of result by simulation.  Given it 
is not even known for sure the Tout thermocouple was in direct contact 
with metal, this is not a far reach.  However, if I could show even a 
possible fraud based mechanism exists which simulates the results with 
the given inputs, that would be sufficient to demonstrate the 
calorimetry requires improving.  It should be sufficient to quell at 
least some of the ridiculous non-quantitative arm waving true believer 
arguments made here, but probably won't.


You do see the difference between calling Rossi an evil criminal 
fraudster and showing a logical mechanism exists which reproduces the 
experiment outputs given only the experiment inputs, don't you?  The 
purpose for the latter 

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Seems someone did manage to click a few photos anyway.

AG


On 11/10/2011 9:38 AM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

2011/11/10 Horace Heffner:

(it was not mine
impression, but my impression is based on indirect conclusion made
that I do not remember anyone saying seen such a large black box
inside),

If you had read my paper you would have seen a photograph appended of the
30x30x30 cm interior box, with sealed pipe fittings going into it from the
front of the larger box.


This cannot be right, because Rossi explicitly forbid to take any
pictures or video footage from interior that was examined using
flashlights. Therefore you cannot rely on pictures, but you must
interview those who examined the interiors of E-Cat.

–Jouni

Re: [Vo]:Minor progress

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

What if the patent theory is wrong and Piantelli or W-L is right? Would 
he then be left with no protection other than trade secrets?


I do note he is seeking non disclosed uni research help as he tries to 
get them to help him understand how his reactor really works. I don't 
envy Rossi, knowing he may have no IP protection, not really understand 
how the reaction works but wanting to make money from his multi year 
efforts. Also the latest, NO MORE TESTS, says bugger off all you who 
seek to understand what is going on, you will get NO more information to 
help you figure this out.


Rossi is between a rock and a hard place.

AG


On 11/10/2011 9:59 AM, Jeff Sutton wrote:
I don't doubt that Rossi has something new and fantastic, and I don't 
doubt that he is eccentric in some way as are most of us and this 
explains some of the nonsensical things.  I also believe he is quite 
intelligent.
But the only way to think that his process makes any "business-first 
approach" is that he has still something to hide.  It could be he is 
missing something to do with control of the reaction,  or he has no 
new art for his patent; someone else has beaten him to it.


Think if everything was normal.  Ross could arrange 
an independent demo(s) in front of reputable persons.  From that he 
could explain what he does in a patent application and it would be 
granted.  He would win the Nobel price and untold fortune.


His current approach seems silly and I dont think he is a silly man.

On Wed, Nov 9, 2011 at 6:18 PM, Jed Rothwell > wrote:


Horace Heffner mailto:hheff...@mtaonline.net>> wrote:

Fraud or self delusion are of course possibilities I
recognize, as do many others, especially given Rossi's
inability numerous times to provide anything other than highly
flawed calorimetry data, or refusal to admit the importance of
such mundane scientific concepts as controls, etc.  The lives
of billions of people are affected by Rossi's actions now,
regardless the outcome.  Why will he never make the tiny
incremental effort required to properly demonstrate he
produces nuclear heat?


That's a little unfair. Assume for a moment that Rossi really does
have a customer and that Fioravanti is a real HVAC engineer hired
by the customer.

In that case he has done everything right. You cannot ask for
better test than an industrial scale professional boiler test.

I think it comes down to a few simple questions: Is Fioravanti who
he claims to be? Is that sheet of paper he signed what it appears
to be -- a sales contract test acceptance report? If so, then
Rossi has done exactly what he claimed he would to all long. No
one can fault his business-first approach. The fact that he does
not do academic science-style tests with proper controls and so on
is irrelevant. A professional boiler test is _far more convincing_
and more relevant. As I have often pointed out, HVAC engineers
have completely different standards from physicists in academic
laboratories. Engineers do not do blank experiments. They do not
do controls. That is not part of their protocol. Asking them to do
such things is ridiculous.

Do not impose the standards of academic science on industrial
engineering, or vice versa. The two are very different, for good
reasons. What works well in a science lab may not work in a
factory. Rossi is an industrial engineer. He makes large
machines. Fioravanti  tests large machines (assuming he is for
real). It makes no sense to demand they use methods appropriate to
the lab bench top.

As I said, I do not fault his business first-approach. I wish he
would pursue business and money more aggressively on a larger scale.

- Jed

[Vo]:Inside the inner box

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I have been thinking about what should be inside the inner box as the 
heat transfer from the reactor core to the fluid is no longer done 
inside the door knob like reactor.


Rossi says there are 3 cores inside each module and that is all he says. 
I would suggest he may have encased all the cores inside a solid lead 
slab like structure with a thermal interface compound applied to the top 
and bottom surfaces so as to thermally transfer the heat into the upper 
and assumed lower fin assemblies. What we see with the bolts is the 
upper surface of the heat exchanger assembly and likely an identical 
assembly (why make it different) on the bottom. The lead slab with the 
embedded cores is then sandwiched inside and between the heat exchanger 
fin assemblies. I also suggest as he said the 1 MW demo was only running 
on 1 core per module, he has a was to activate and deactivate the 
internal cores as desired. This adds additional weight to my belief that 
the "RF Wires" are actually multi core shielded cable or if not he maybe 
running a power line comms system that delivers both power and 2 way 
data to the 3 cores. Easy to do today, especially if he has a micro 
inside to assist the core control and do data logging that can be later 
accessed for analysis.


Having a solid lead slab structure would aid modular maintenance and 
module fuel replacement as all the the maintenance guys would need do is 
replace the lead slab with the 3 embedded reactor cores, which would 
then be returned to Rossi for replacement of the fuel.


From the weight of the E-Cat module, there is more inside the boxes 
than just 3 door knob reactors, a bit of piping, fins, walls and a few 
nuts and bolts.

Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Sure no CPU will survive inside or next to the core but next to the heat 
sinks, easy to do. 140 deg C chips are available. Please share the data 
on the rectangular cores. Never read that before. Swedish reporter did 
say RF leads measured 300ma. Doesn't sound like a sensor. Easy to do PLC 
(Power Line Comms) to a CPU inside or he is using a 300ma current loop 
for his internal sensors due to too much interference from the cores.


If the core is running at 600 deg C, so too must have the door knob 
earlier unit. It is hard to see now Rossi could keep that core at 600 
deg C while the water was only a mm or so away. Where did you get the 
600 deg C data from? I have never read that but then I have just started 
reading, reading...reading.


AG


On 11/10/2011 4:01 PM, David Roberson wrote:

The three cores are now in a rectangular shape instead of cylindrical.
I would suggest that there is a thermal resistance(insulator of some 
sort) desired between the cores and the heat sink.  This would act as 
a thermal matching system so that the cores can operate at nearly 600 
C while the heat sink is at a far lower temperature.
Time response data demonstrates that two time constants are at work.  
One long one related to heat release and a shorter one associated with 
the conduction of heat away from the heat sink and heating device.
He could easily disable a core by putting in material that does not 
exhibit LENR.
The 1 MW unit must have operated with 3 cores present.  One core only 
produces 3.4 kW of output power in the driven mode, less in self 
sustaining.
The core operates at a temperature that would destroy a 
microcontroller.  600 C
I suspect that the two extra wires are actually for sensor reading.  A 
controlled driven unit would need to measure liquid level and 
temperature to function well.  I really suspect that the frequency 
generating device is to mislead.
The test conducted on October 6 was using one core.  The thermal 
environment in this case would not be the same as using 3 cores.  
Additional positive feedback of heat would occur due to the two 
additional cores if they were active.  I suspect that Rossi 
has performed a delicate balance of thermal impedance when 3 cores are 
present.  This would suggest that the 1 core test should loose output 
power at a faster rate.  That would explain why the self sustaining 
mode for the 1 MW test ran for such a long time.
It has been apparent that Rossi has made a serious effort to disguise 
the real data by his actions.  I suspect he wants to keep doubt alive 
so that the 'war' does not start until the last moment.

Dave

-Original Message-----
From: Aussie Guy E-Cat 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Nov 9, 2011 11:41 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

I have been thinking about what should be inside the inner box as the
heat transfer from the reactor core to the fluid is no longer done
inside the door knob like reactor.

Rossi says there are 3 cores inside each module and that is all he says.
I would suggest he may have encased all the cores inside a solid lead
slab like structure with a thermal interface compound applied to the top
and bottom surfaces so as to thermally transfer the heat into the upper
and assumed lower fin assemblies. What we see with the bolts is the
upper surface of the heat exchanger assembly and likely an identical
assembly (why make it different) on the bottom. The lead slab with the
embedded cores is then sandwiched inside and between the heat exchanger
fin assemblies. I also suggest as he said the 1 MW demo was only running
on 1 core per module, he has a was to activate and deactivate the
internal cores as desired. This adds additional weight to my belief that
the "RF Wires" are actually multi core shielded cable or if not he maybe
running a power line comms system that delivers both power and 2 way
data to the 3 cores. Easy to do today, especially if he has a micro
inside to assist the core control and do data logging that can be later
accessed for analysis.

Having a solid lead slab structure would aid modular maintenance and
module fuel replacement as all the the maintenance guys would need do is
replace the lead slab with the 3 embedded reactor cores, which would
then be returned to Rossi for replacement of the fuel.

  From the weight of the E-Cat module, there is more inside the boxes
than just 3 door knob reactors, a bit of piping, fins, walls and a few
nuts and bolts.

Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

For the per core driven output I get, 1,000 kWs / (52 modules X 3 cores) 
= 6.41 kWs per core or 19.23 kWs per module of 3 cores. Based on 107 
modules with 1 operational core (as demonstrated) and 479 kWs of output 
that is 4.47 kW per core in self sustain mode.


AG


On 11/10/2011 4:01 PM, David Roberson wrote:

The three cores are now in a rectangular shape instead of cylindrical.
I would suggest that there is a thermal resistance(insulator of some 
sort) desired between the cores and the heat sink.  This would act as 
a thermal matching system so that the cores can operate at nearly 600 
C while the heat sink is at a far lower temperature.
Time response data demonstrates that two time constants are at work.  
One long one related to heat release and a shorter one associated with 
the conduction of heat away from the heat sink and heating device.
He could easily disable a core by putting in material that does not 
exhibit LENR.
The 1 MW unit must have operated with 3 cores present.  One core only 
produces 3.4 kW of output power in the driven mode, less in self 
sustaining.
The core operates at a temperature that would destroy a 
microcontroller.  600 C
I suspect that the two extra wires are actually for sensor reading.  A 
controlled driven unit would need to measure liquid level and 
temperature to function well.  I really suspect that the frequency 
generating device is to mislead.
The test conducted on October 6 was using one core.  The thermal 
environment in this case would not be the same as using 3 cores.  
Additional positive feedback of heat would occur due to the two 
additional cores if they were active.  I suspect that Rossi 
has performed a delicate balance of thermal impedance when 3 cores are 
present.  This would suggest that the 1 core test should loose output 
power at a faster rate.  That would explain why the self sustaining 
mode for the 1 MW test ran for such a long time.
It has been apparent that Rossi has made a serious effort to disguise 
the real data by his actions.  I suspect he wants to keep doubt alive 
so that the 'war' does not start until the last moment.

Dave

-Original Message-----
From: Aussie Guy E-Cat 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Wed, Nov 9, 2011 11:41 pm
Subject: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

I have been thinking about what should be inside the inner box as the
heat transfer from the reactor core to the fluid is no longer done
inside the door knob like reactor.

Rossi says there are 3 cores inside each module and that is all he says.
I would suggest he may have encased all the cores inside a solid lead
slab like structure with a thermal interface compound applied to the top
and bottom surfaces so as to thermally transfer the heat into the upper
and assumed lower fin assemblies. What we see with the bolts is the
upper surface of the heat exchanger assembly and likely an identical
assembly (why make it different) on the bottom. The lead slab with the
embedded cores is then sandwiched inside and between the heat exchanger
fin assemblies. I also suggest as he said the 1 MW demo was only running
on 1 core per module, he has a was to activate and deactivate the
internal cores as desired. This adds additional weight to my belief that
the "RF Wires" are actually multi core shielded cable or if not he maybe
running a power line comms system that delivers both power and 2 way
data to the 3 cores. Easy to do today, especially if he has a micro
inside to assist the core control and do data logging that can be later
accessed for analysis.

Having a solid lead slab structure would aid modular maintenance and
module fuel replacement as all the the maintenance guys would need do is
replace the lead slab with the 3 embedded reactor cores, which would
then be returned to Rossi for replacement of the fuel.

  From the weight of the E-Cat module, there is more inside the boxes
than just 3 door knob reactors, a bit of piping, fins, walls and a few
nuts and bolts.

[Vo]:JNP site down

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com

Comes up account suspended. WTF?

Re: [Vo]:JNP site down

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

The Blog reader may have been responsible for that. But then his traffic 
volume data rate rate should not be that big and instead of suspending, 
it should have charged him for any excess data traffic.


AG

On 11/10/2011 5:13 PM, Colin Hercus wrote:
I expect his traffic volume has gone up and he's gone foul of limits 
imposed by his web hosting service.


On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 2:38 PM, Peter Gluck <mailto:peter.gl...@gmail.com>> wrote:


It is not for the first time, it happens...for a few hours.
Let's see...
What's strange- the blog reader rossilivecat.com
<http://rossilivecat.com> is also
non-functional.
Peter


On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 8:30 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com

Comes up account suspended. WTF?




-- 
Dr. Peter Gluck

Cluj, Romania
http://egooutpeters.blogspot.com

Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Ok a good call. No micros inside. When Rossi's tech was getting ready to 
open the module, he wipes away a lot of white powder that was sitting on 
top of the top metal plate. Do you think the powder might have been 
powered Boric Acid placed all around the E-Cat as a neutron shield?


AG


On 11/10/2011 6:39 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

I think its unlikely that semiconductors are inside.
At the september demo the temperature was 120° and if 3 cores are in opereation 
I would expect more.
A single case of overheating would damage the system and Rossi claims a maximum 
temp of abaout 450°.
Also all these gamma and possibly neutron bursts that have been observed could 
degrade the semiconductors.


- Original Nachricht 
Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat
An:  vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum:   10.11.2011 05:38
Betreff: [Vo]:Inside the inner box


I have been thinking about what should be inside the inner box as the
heat transfer from the reactor core to the fluid is no longer done
inside the door knob like reactor.

Rossi says there are 3 cores inside each module and that is all he says.
I would suggest he may have encased all the cores inside a solid lead
slab like structure with a thermal interface compound applied to the top
and bottom surfaces so as to thermally transfer the heat into the upper
and assumed lower fin assemblies. What we see with the bolts is the
upper surface of the heat exchanger assembly and likely an identical
assembly (why make it different) on the bottom. The lead slab with the
embedded cores is then sandwiched inside and between the heat exchanger
fin assemblies. I also suggest as he said the 1 MW demo was only running
on 1 core per module, he has a was to activate and deactivate the
internal cores as desired. This adds additional weight to my belief that
the "RF Wires" are actually multi core shielded cable or if not he maybe
running a power line comms system that delivers both power and 2 way
data to the 3 cores. Easy to do today, especially if he has a micro
inside to assist the core control and do data logging that can be later
accessed for analysis.

Having a solid lead slab structure would aid modular maintenance and
module fuel replacement as all the the maintenance guys would need do is
replace the lead slab with the 3 embedded reactor cores, which would
then be returned to Rossi for replacement of the fuel.

  From the weight of the E-Cat module, there is more inside the boxes
than just 3 door knob reactors, a bit of piping, fins, walls and a few
nuts and bolts.

Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

The white powder was between what looks like 2 sheets of lead directly 
on the top of the top pate of the reactor box. Start watching from 11:00 
minutes http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-5cFOsisAo&feature=player_embedded#!


AG


On 11/10/2011 6:57 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

I cannot say this. I dont even know wether the powder came from the inside or 
outside.
Posiibly it comes from leaked and evaporated water?

Rossi claimed 120° overheated steam @ air pressure. Thats a litle bit strange.
If he used salty water with elevated boiling point, this could explain it.
I dont know, if it is possible to rise the boiling point so much with salts.
With glycol it is possible.


- Original Nachricht 
Von: Aussie Guy E-Cat
An:  vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum:   10.11.2011 09:15
Betreff: Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box


Ok a good call. No micros inside. When Rossi's tech was getting ready to
open the module, he wipes away a lot of white powder that was sitting on
top of the top metal plate. Do you think the powder might have been
powered Boric Acid placed all around the E-Cat as a neutron shield?

AG


On 11/10/2011 6:39 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

I think its unlikely that semiconductors are inside.
At the september demo the temperature was 120° and if 3 cores are in

opereation I would expect more.

A single case of overheating would damage the system and Rossi claims a

maximum temp of abaout 450°.

Also all these gamma and possibly neutron bursts that have been observed

could degrade the semiconductors.


- Original Nachricht 
Von:     Aussie Guy E-Cat
An:  vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum:   10.11.2011 05:38
Betreff: [Vo]:Inside the inner box


I have been thinking about what should be inside the inner box as the
heat transfer from the reactor core to the fluid is no longer done
inside the door knob like reactor.

Rossi says there are 3 cores inside each module and that is all he says.
I would suggest he may have encased all the cores inside a solid lead
slab like structure with a thermal interface compound applied to the top
and bottom surfaces so as to thermally transfer the heat into the upper
and assumed lower fin assemblies. What we see with the bolts is the
upper surface of the heat exchanger assembly and likely an identical
assembly (why make it different) on the bottom. The lead slab with the
embedded cores is then sandwiched inside and between the heat exchanger
fin assemblies. I also suggest as he said the 1 MW demo was only running
on 1 core per module, he has a was to activate and deactivate the
internal cores as desired. This adds additional weight to my belief that
the "RF Wires" are actually multi core shielded cable or if not he maybe
running a power line comms system that delivers both power and 2 way
data to the 3 cores. Easy to do today, especially if he has a micro
inside to assist the core control and do data logging that can be later
accessed for analysis.

Having a solid lead slab structure would aid modular maintenance and
module fuel replacement as all the the maintenance guys would need do is
replace the lead slab with the 3 embedded reactor cores, which would
then be returned to Rossi for replacement of the fuel.

   From the weight of the E-Cat module, there is more inside the boxes
than just 3 door knob reactors, a bit of piping, fins, walls and a few
nuts and bolts.

Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

The white powder was between 2 sheets of lead that were on the top of 
the top plate of the outer reactor box. Start watching from 11:00 
minutes 
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-5cFOsisAo&feature=player_embedded# 
<http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2-5cFOsisAo&feature=player_embedded#>!


AG



On 11/10/2011 11:52 PM, Stephen A. Lawrence wrote:



On 11-11-10 03:15 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:
Ok a good call. No micros inside. When Rossi's tech was getting ready 
to open the module, he wipes away a lot of white powder that was 
sitting on top of the top metal plate. Do you think the powder might 
have been powered Boric Acid placed all around the E-Cat as a neutron 
shield?


Keeps roaches out of the inner box, as well.

Just how thick a coat of white powder was there, anyway?  For boric 
acid to block many neutrons you'd need just a bit more than what you 
need to block most roaches, I think.

Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Interesting Mats Lewan comment: 
http://lenr-canr.org/RossiData/Lewan%20Oct%20%206%20test%20description.pdf


"Inside the heat exchanger there supposedly was a layer of about 5 
centimeters of shielding, and inside the shielding the reactor body, 
supposedly measuring 20 x 20 x 1 centimeters and containing three 
reactor chambers."


Which suggests the 20 x 20 x 1 cm reactor body was encased in a 30 x 30 
x 5 cm slab of lead. That leaves 25 cm of room for the heat exchange 
fins. Any idea of the height of the top fins? From that we can get the 
height of the bottom set of fins, if any.


Also interesting is that this suggests each reactor chamber was max 20 
long x 6.7 cm wide and 1 cm high minus the thickness of the enclosing 
walls, chamber separators, roof and floor. Seems to be quite a different 
design to the door knob earlier design unless that design was this 
design but rolled up?


AG


On 11/11/2011 3:33 AM, Higgins Bob-CBH003 wrote:


Mats Lewan told me that the cylinder was not attached to the gas inlet 
(it just looked that way in some photos) and its purpose was a 
radiation sensor (probably a gamma scintillator). Mats said the 
frequency device was behind the eCat – so I keep looking for glimpses 
of it in the videos.


Regards,
Bob Higgins

*From:*David Roberson [mailto:dlrober...@aol.com]
*Sent:* Thursday, November 10, 2011 9:54 AM
*To:* vortex-l@eskimo.com
*Subject:* Re: [Vo]:Inside the inner box

AG, I do not remember exactly where Rossi made the statement that the 
cores were now flat and planar or rectangular in shape. Seems like it 
was a question I asked him on his blog. I had suggested that he use 
this form factor many months ago because it had scaling advantages, 
but at the earlier time they answered that the cylindrical form worked 
better. I guess they reconsidered. Maybe someone else can help 
remember exactly when Rossi made the statement.


I do not have any form of search for words to go through his archives 
to locate the exact place where the 600 C is mentioned. The exact 
temperature (600-1200) applied to the core has been bounced around 
frequently. You may have to do some digging.


The RF leads question seems a little confusing for one main reason. A 
long cylinder was attached to the gas port at the time the RF device 
was mentioned. I have always assumed that this was the 'frequencies' 
device.


Dave

Re: [Vo]:National Instruments signs to do E-Cat controls

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

These guys (NI) know what they are doing. No BS with them. It works, it 
works right and it works all the time. Brilliant move.


AG


On 11/11/2011 12:04 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Bravo!

I hope it is true.

This is exactly the right thing to do. You have to hand it to Rossi. 
He has good technical judgement. Reckless, but good. Mizuno, Ohmori 
and Fleischmann are the same way. McKubre says Fleischmann's 
experiments scared the pants off of people.


A person does not design a biofuel Diesel engine without knowing a lot 
about thermodynamics and practical engineering, and without being a 
good judge of how to Get Things Done. Rossi works fast. He isn't 
afraid to change the design as often as needed, even if it means he 
has to scrap a pile of reactors. That is the mark of a good 
experimentalist. People like that are great at innovation, although 
they drive the production department crazy. My grandfather was like 
that. His brother-in-law, who was in charge of production and sales, 
used to tell him: "Stop inventing new stuff! We haven't even recovered 
the cost of setting up to make what you just came up with!"


I just wish Rossi would pay more attention to needs of customers and 
to PR. If he has teamed up with NI, that is exactly the right way to 
bolster customer confidence in the safety and reliability of the 
equipment.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:National Instruments signs to do E-Cat controls

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Simple to fix. Just paint a big E-CAT logo on the side of the container 
and on each module. ;)


AG


On 11/11/2011 5:56 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

http://www.ni.com/legal/trademarks/

Rules for usage, excerpt:
# Do not display any NI Trademark more prominently than your own trademarks, 
service marks or trade names.

This means, if Rossi has no trademark, he cannot use the NI Trademark.
He must get an own Trademark first.


- Original Nachricht 
Von: Akira Shirakawa
An:  vortex-l@eskimo.com
Datum:   11.11.2011 00:53
Betreff: [Vo]:National Instruments signs to do E-Cat controls


Via PESN:

"Today, Leonardo Corporation, led by Andrea Rossi, inventor and
developer of the one-megawatt cold fusion E-Cat plant, signed an
agreement with National Instruments (NI), to have them make all the
instrumentation for the E-Cat plants, which began commercial sales on
October 28, following the successful test in Bologna, Italy of the first
1 MW heat plant to the first customer."

More details on PESN:
http://pesn.com/2011/11/10/9601953_National_Instruments_signs_to_do_E-Cat_co
ntrols/

Great news!
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:Physorg comments : new Krivit Crusade

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Rossi has stated each E-Cat module has it own control system. There are 
2 wires / cables connected to each module in addition to a earth wire 
plus the 2 heater power wires. I doubt the 2 non heater power wires are 
there for show. Additionally it has been disclosed that Rossi and NI 
have been working together for some time as well as the fact that Rossi 
had 107 modules working in parallel for 5.5 hours and maintained a very 
good regulation on the heat output. I really doubt he can manually 
control 107 E-Cat modules for 10 minutes yet alone for 5.5 hours.There 
must be a good control system with monitoring and control for each E-Cat 
module as well as a master control system to coordinate the 107 modules 
to maintain the desired operational mode and output.


He has also stated that each plant is delivered with a fully functional 
control system and full instructions for plant start up and operation.


There is much that Rossi has yet to reveal.

AG


On 11/11/2011 11:06 PM, Vorl Bek wrote:

Higgins Bob-CBH003  wrote:

One of the reasons that Rossi may not wish to run a very long
test is that

I suspect that HE is the control mechanism.  When it is run
in self-sustaining mode, after some period it will need to be
briefly reheated to stabilize the mode.  If it was not in
self-sustaining mode, then it may be in greater danger of
thermal run-away . . .


This is what Rossi has said on many occasions. He says he cannot
leave the thing, especially in self-sustaining mode.

The idea that Rossi would do an unconvincing demo because he
needed to empty his bladder or get some sleep, and could not
delegate control for a while, makes little sense.

Rossi is not doing the whole thing by himself. He has a
team working with/for him. If he wanted to put on a convincing
demo, especially when the observers included an engineer from
NASA, a possible source of all that nice money, then wouldn't he
have taught the team members how to do whatever was needed to
periodically stabilize the reaction?

[Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

http://www.leonardo-ecat.com

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I find this very interesting. Where is there a scam here?

http://www.leonardo-ecat.com/fp/Products/1MW_Plant/index.html
*Purchase Terms*

 * Price: 2,000 Euros per kilowatt.
 * 1 MW plant. Only under approved circumstances will smaller sizes be
   considered, but no less than 100 kW.
 * Full payment into escrow account.
 * License contract written up specific to customer.
 * Escrow funds released to Leonardo Corp upon satisfactory completion
   of plant test per customer-Leonardo agreement. Escrow funds return
   to customer if test results are not satisfactory.

For more details and information, please send an email to 
i...@leonardocorp1996.com 


AG


On 11/12/2011 10:10 AM, Terry Blanton wrote:

Major kewl!

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Site says 100 kw min.

Rossi gets nothing until the unit meets specifications.

AG


On 11/12/2011 10:23 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 3:52 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


I find this very interesting. Where is there a scam here?



Oh ok.  Let's order one.  How do I do that exactly?  (medium to small 
please, one each)

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

The money goes into a escrow account. You understand what that means?

AG


On 11/12/2011 10:34 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Site says 100 kw min.

Rossi gets nothing until the unit meets specifications.


Right.  Steorn said something like that too.  They never delivered and 
they have kept and spent €20 millionof investor money along the merry 
way.  They had lots of parties, I heard.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Mary I can 100% assure you that if I was ordering a plant from Rossi and 
my money was in a escrow account, Rossi would not get 1 dollar of that 
money until the plant fully passed the pre agreed performance 
conditions. I would expect every other purchaser would be the same.


I would suggest this openly posted sales conditions really takes the 
wind out of your sails. Under these E-Cat plant sales conditions, there 
can be no fraud or scam. EUR 200k is not that much money to get a taste 
of what the E-Cat can do.


I applaud Rossi for openly declaring the payment conditions. Well done sir.

AG


On 11/12/2011 10:34 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 4:00 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Site says 100 kw min.

Rossi gets nothing until the unit meets specifications.


Right.  Steorn said something like that too.  They never delivered and 
they have kept and spent €20 millionof investor money along the merry 
way.  They had lots of parties, I heard.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Nice to see the web site is registered to Rossi but what the heck does 
the validity of the E-Cat have to do with the software that was used to 
create the web site or who the web site was created by or who it is 
administered by?


I suggest the sales and payment conditions has just totally taken the 
wind out of the sails of all the scam / fraud group.


AG


On 11/12/2011 11:09 AM, Sean True wrote:

The design is dated, as is the software used to create it: Microsoft
Frontpage 4.0 (circa 2000).
The domain appears to be hosted on pair.com, which is a step up from
stayhosted ...

I suspect that Mr. Rossi is following the advice of friends, and is
not providing the best possible
venue for his ideas, products, hopes, and dreams. Then again, perhaps
this is part of the grand
plan to deflect attention and discourage people from taking his
business seriously. In any case,
there are now more tea leaves to read.


Domain information:

Registration Service Provided By: Namecheap.com
Contact: supp...@namecheap.com
Visit: http://namecheap.com
Domain name: leonardo-ecat.com

Registrant Contact:
Leonardo Corporation
Andrea Rossi
116 South River Road
Bedford, NH 03110
US

Administrative Contact:
PES Network, Inc
Sterling Allan (sterlin...@pureenergysystems.com)
+1.8014071292
PO Box 429
Mount Pleasant, UT 84647-0429
US

Technical Contact:
PES Network, Inc
Sterling Allan (sterlin...@pureenergysystems.com)
+1.8014071292
PO Box 429
Mount Pleasant, UT 84647-0429
US

Status: Locked

Name Servers:
ns371.pair.com
ns7.ns0.com

Creation date: 11 Nov 2011 17:12:00
Expiration date: 11 Nov 2012 09:12:00

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Oct / Nov sure has been interesting:

06 Oct - Single E-Cat module demo
28 Oct - 1 MW E-Cat plant demo with first sales announcement
10 Nov - NI announcement
12 Nov - E-Cat web site up with sales / payment conditions that destroys 
those that call scam / fraud


This E-Cat powered train has left the station and is gathering speed. 
Next announcement is?


AG


On 11/12/2011 11:36 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:

Nice to see the web site is registered to Rossi but what the heck does
the validity of the E-Cat have to do with the software that was used to
create the web site or who the web site was created by or who it is
administered by?

I suggest the sales and payment conditions has just totally taken the
wind out of the sails of all the scam / fraud group.

AG


On 11/12/2011 11:09 AM, Sean True wrote:

The design is dated, as is the software used to create it: Microsoft
Frontpage 4.0 (circa 2000).
The domain appears to be hosted on pair.com, which is a step up from
stayhosted ...

I suspect that Mr. Rossi is following the advice of friends, and is
not providing the best possible
venue for his ideas, products, hopes, and dreams. Then again, perhaps
this is part of the grand
plan to deflect attention and discourage people from taking his
business seriously. In any case,
there are now more tea leaves to read.


Domain information:

Registration Service Provided By: Namecheap.com
Contact: supp...@namecheap.com
Visit: http://namecheap.com
Domain name: leonardo-ecat.com

Registrant Contact:
Leonardo Corporation
Andrea Rossi
116 South River Road
Bedford, NH 03110
US

Administrative Contact:
PES Network, Inc
Sterling Allan (sterlin...@pureenergysystems.com)
+1.8014071292
PO Box 429
Mount Pleasant, UT 84647-0429
US

Technical Contact:
PES Network, Inc
Sterling Allan (sterlin...@pureenergysystems.com)
+1.8014071292
PO Box 429
Mount Pleasant, UT 84647-0429
US

Status: Locked

Name Servers:
ns371.pair.com
ns7.ns0.com

Creation date: 11 Nov 2011 17:12:00
Expiration date: 11 Nov 2012 09:12:00

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Nothing wrong with old programmers and old engineers. Cut by first code 
on a 8008 system that I designed and built. Had a whole 256 bytes of 
ram. Put the program in with switches. Now that is old code.


AG


On 11/12/2011 11:56 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
Michele Comitini > wrote:


Digging in to the html code, the headers tell it all about quality...
made with FrontPage software that was discontinued in 2003!


I do not see why that matters.

For LENR-CANR.org I use Borland Delphi 4, discontinued in 1999. I 
sometimes tweak the HTML _by hand_. With Programmers Text Editor. For 
shame!


You got a problem with retro-looking HTML? You got a problem with old 
programs, and old programmers?


I was going to complain that these screens look too modern. Too busy. 
I like Google's main page.



Terry Blanton mailto:hohlr...@gmail.com>> wrote:

> Yah.  Looks like a camp stove.

It actually looks like a Coleman camp stove had sex with a Honda
generator!


I love it!

- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Mary you don't get it do you? Rossi is not selling to the public. 
Rossi's customers are engineering firms that I will assure you will not 
part with 1 dollar unless the E-Cat plant meets their min agreed conditions.


Spin this any way you try but your time here claiming scam / fraud is 
over. Rossi's payment conditions and his selected customer base has seen 
to that.


AG


On 11/12/2011 12:25 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:


On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Nice to see the web site is registered to Rossi but what the heck
does the validity of the E-Cat have to do with the software that
was used to create the web site or who the web site was created by
or who it is administered by?


I agree, very little.  But it's unlikely that a prosperous and 
sophisticated company would do it that way, that's all.


I suggest the sales and payment conditions has just totally taken
the wind out of the sails of all the scam / fraud group.


Oh, Gee!  Not at all.  A common form of scam is to take money 
somewhere near the start from secret investors who sign an NDA so they 
can't talk or write on public forums.  The NDA is usually extremely 
broad in scope and if someone hints at breaking it, all sorts of 
threats of law suits begin.


Meanwhile, the perpetrators buy an ad or two or do a web page or other 
introduction, have news releases and press conferences, and announce a 
new company that promises all sorts of wonders.  They usually have 
some sort of photo op and maybe a carefully contrived demonstration 
that believers can sop up but which really proves nothing.   The next 
step is to announce that a lot of the proceeds will go to charity.  
Blogs sprout up praising the device and fantasizing what will happen 
in the future when it is widely adopted.  Skeptics are scorned and 
insulted and eventually banned from enthusiast sites.Then, the 
scammer says they won't be taking investment money now.  Maybe in the 
future they'll go public but they're doing this "on their own".  The 
secret investors aren't mentioned and they can't say a peep due to 
their NDA.  They also don't want to jeopardize success and future 
profits.  Some are simply too embarrassed to speak.


Customers are announced but somehow they're never produced.  Test are 
declined if they're too definitive.  Hey, they'd reveal too many trade 
secrets.  Patents?  "Sometimes it's no, sometimes it's yes, it just 
couldn't matter less" (from Gigi, 1958, IMDB).


Along the way, more secret investors may be picked up.  The investment 
amount can get really large -- Steorn so far has been $21 million 
Euros.  The money is spent or squirreled away.  It can go on for years 
with no product, no proper testing and no customers who can verify 
that the product is real.


That's the quick version.  Is that what Rossi is?  In my mind, he fits 
the script but he's more daring about demos than most  --but who 
knows?  The more time goes by between the customer announcement and 
some credible souls vouching for a bona fide sale and of course a 
proper test -- the longer it takes, the more likely it's a scam.  Nine 
months and counting now.


You think people are too sophisticated to give money to scammers?  You 
must read different news articles than I do.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

You mean this:
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=sv&sl=sv&tl=en&u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.oru.se%2FKalendarium%2FStartsida-Kalendarium%2Foffentliga-forelasningar%2FOffentliga-forelasningar-Morgondagens-karnkraft---blir-den-kall-eller-varm-%2F

Should be interesting but I expect more news to surface before then. ;)

AG


On 11/12/2011 12:10 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

Kullander will talk about the ecat on 11/23.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

For us Aussies, yesterday was Remembrance Day:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Remembrance_Day

Whole country stopped for 1 minute to remember fallen mates. :(

AG


On 11/12/2011 12:39 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:
... Today has been declared National Corduroy Day since 11/11/11/ 
looks so much like corduroy. Soon we will see, for the second time 
today, 11:11:11 on 11/11/11. How many boils will need lancing? :-) T 

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Please tell me how Rossi can scam a engineering firm E-Cat sales 
customer with his payment terms? He can't. Everything else you say has 
no real meaning or value. Rossi knows the meat in the sandwich is the 
meeting the claimed COP 6 performance. No one really cares who is or who 
is not on the board. Engineers say show me the performance and how you 
will support the warranty over the products life. As a engineer, my only 
real concern now is reliability and risk assessment. MTBF and MTTR stuff.


AG


On 11/12/2011 12:42 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:



Spin this any way you try but your time here claiming scam / fraud
is over.


Sure. When you can name one customer with some reputation for 
credibility and they prove they've done a proper test -- but not 
before, OK?


Someone at Ecatnews.com pointed out that the web site is so bad that 
someone left in this name:


Prof. George Kelly (University of New Hampshire – USA)

That is a throw back to Rossi's "board of directors" for his silly 
blog he pretends is a peer reviewed journal.  Except that the guy 
apparently doesn't exist.  At least that's what I've read on the 
ultrareliable internet.  Anyone know Professor Kelly personally at U 
of NH?

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

You have suggested Rossi may have scammed investors? Bold statement 
there Mary. Care to disclose your proof as otherwise you may have just 
committed Defamation and I'm sure the Vortex administrators will not 
wish to be involved in hosting defamatory comments.


A bit of advise Mary, if I may, is that unless you have the money to 
defend a defamation action, I would suggest you be a bit more careful 
about making statement you apparently have no real proof of and are, I 
suspect, just making up to support your apparent spin efforts to 
discredit Rossi and the E-Cat. I should also point out that you can not 
hide behind a internet alias. The courts do have the ability to peal 
back the internet layers and find out who you really are.


AG


On 11/12/2011 1:06 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 6:33 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


Please tell me how Rossi can scam a engineering firm


Perhaps I wasn't clear.  I suggested he may have scammed investors, 
not an engineering firm.  Was some part of that in need of further 
elaboration?

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

You claimed Rossi may have scammed investors. Prove it or stop making up 
statement that you may wish to be real.


BTW to engineers, he has proved the E-Cat works and that is all he needs 
to do. Why? Because his customers are engineering firms who do know how 
to measure the heat the E-Cat generates and how much energy it consumes. 
Case closed.



AG


On 11/12/2011 1:39 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:



You have suggested Rossi may have scammed investors? Bold
statement there Mary. Care to disclose your proof as otherwise you
may have just committed Defamation and I'm sure the Vortex
administrators will not wish to be involved in hosting defamatory
comments.

A bit of advise Mary, if I may, is that unless you have the money
to defend a defamation action, I would suggest you be a bit more
careful about making statement you apparently have no real proof
of and are, I suspect, just making up to support your apparent
spin efforts to discredit Rossi and the E-Cat. I should also point
out that you can not hide behind a internet alias. The courts do
have the ability to peal back the internet layers and find out who
you really are.



Wow.  I'm terrified.  Well, I'm going to be in good company in court.  
FYI, suggesting the possibility of fraud is not defamation, especially 
when supported by a careful explanation.  Calling Rossi a rank, 
obvious scammer would be defamation but of course, he'd have to prove 
he's not.   The best proof would be to prove that the E-cat is real 
and works.  Oh wait... he hasn't done that.


James Randi was sued by an obvious fraud called Sniffex back in 
2006.   The judge ordered Sniffex to demonstrate the device in court 
in the presence of court appointed experts.  They dropped the suit.  
Maybe I should call Rossi names and force his hand but actually that's 
not my style.  The reality is that I believed early on Rossi might 
have something.  Almost everything he's said and done since has helped 
to disabuse me of that belief.  It would be truly ironic if the 
greatest invention of the last century was developed like Steorn (or 
any one of the other dozen or so silly ideas and scams Sterling Allan 
pushes at any given time).  Or do you really think Obama was on Mars?


"Teleportation  >
*Mars visitors Basiago and Stillings confirm Barack Obama traveled to 
Mars 
* 
(2 
 
| interview 
 
mp3) - Two former participants in the CIA’s Mars visitation program of 
the early 1980’s have confirmed that U.S. President Barack H. Obama 
was enrolled in their Mars training class in 1980 and was among the 
young Americans from the program who they later encountered on the 
Martian surface after reaching Mars via “jump room.” (/Examiner/; 
November 6, 2011) "


From http://peswiki.com/index.php/Main_Page This is the same 
author as the one who did Rossi's web site!


Regrettably, the link is dead.  Probably a UFO shot it.

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Mary you just do not get it do you? You can't go around saying you think 
Rossi may have scammed investors. That is defamation. You don't know if 
he has any investors, do you? You don't know how he raised his funding 
do you? Well he did that by selling a business and selling his house.


AG


On 11/12/2011 2:08 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Fri, Nov 11, 2011 at 7:21 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


You claimed Rossi may have scammed investors. Prove it or stop
making up statement that you may wish to be real.


You're making stuff up.  I already said I wish Rossi would be real.  
And yes, he may have scammed investors.  He also might not.  I believe 
that covers it.


BTW to engineers, he has proved the E-Cat works and that is all he
needs to do. Why? Because his customers are engineering firms who
do know how to measure the heat the E-Cat generates and how much
energy it consumes. Case closed.


I have no idea how you know his customers are anything.  He never 
named them.  He never showed a customer!  Supposedly there was an 
engineer from the buyer.  Nobody could confirm that he was.  
Interestingly, he was at the exit interview and nobody seemed to ask 
him anything difficult.  Did they even ask anything of the engineer?


No other client possibilities have emerged.  NI certainly is not one 
despite Craig Brown's foolishly premature post.  The case is far from 
"closed".


I doubt that Rossi will ever scam an engineering firm, a big power 
company, a prestigious factory that needs a heater or anyone who has 
capable people on staff.  Certainly he won't scam money out of anyone 
who consults with Rothwell or Cude or Lawrence or Heffner or Murray or 
many of the people who write regularly on this list that I may not yet 
know.That doesn't mean he can't bamboozle a few investors who have 
more money than good sense.  Maybe already has or is planning to 
soon.  I have no idea.  What Rossi does seems to me to not make much 
sense.  That new web site is an example.   It's just weird.


I don't mean to hurt your feelings. You seem really enamored of this 
thing.   If I upset you that much, maybe you'd prefer I not respond to 
you?

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Ka? I never said Rossi was looking for investors or had any. From what I 
have read he doesn't need them and has self funded this project.


AG


On 11/12/2011 2:26 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Aussie Guy, if you keep insisting that Rossi asked around for 
investors, you are provoking troll attacks, because you are creating a 
strawman for Rossi. Thus, you are helping with the mess around here.


2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>


Mary you just do not get it do you? You can't go around saying you
think Rossi may have scammed investors. That is defamation. You
don't know if he has any investors, do you? You don't know how he
raised his funding do you? Well he did that by selling a business
and selling his house.

AG

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I cautioned that making statements of scamming investors, when those 
statement can not be proven, is defamation. My statements in no way give 
support to those making scamming statements.


AG


On 11/12/2011 2:41 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

You answer to someone as you were acknowledging such fact.

2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>


Ka? I never said Rossi was looking for investors or had any. From
what I have read he doesn't need them and has self funded this
project.

AG



On 11/12/2011 2:26 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

Aussie Guy, if you keep insisting that Rossi asked around for
investors, you are provoking troll attacks, because you are
creating a strawman for Rossi. Thus, you are helping with the
mess around here.

    2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>>


   Mary you just do not get it do you? You can't go around
saying you
   think Rossi may have scammed investors. That is defamation. You
   don't know if he has any investors, do you? You don't know
how he
   raised his funding do you? Well he did that by selling a
business
   and selling his house.

   AG

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Defamation is the act of making a false statements with the intent to 
cause loss of reputation plus a few more. Suggesting to someone that the 
statement they just made may be defamatory, in no way supports the 
defamatory statement.


AG


On 11/12/2011 2:57 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

But you cannot say that is defamatory if there is no investors.

2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>


I cautioned that making statements of scamming investors, when
those statement can not be proven, is defamation. My statements in
no way give support to those making scamming statements.

AG



On 11/12/2011 2:41 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

You answer to someone as you were acknowledging such fact.

2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>>


   Ka? I never said Rossi was looking for investors or had
any. From
   what I have read he doesn't need them and has self funded this
   project.

   AG



   On 11/12/2011 2:26 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

   Aussie Guy, if you keep insisting that Rossi asked
around for
   investors, you are provoking troll attacks, because you are
   creating a strawman for Rossi. Thus, you are helping
with the
   mess around here.

           2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>

<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>>>


  Mary you just do not get it do you? You can't go around
   saying you
  think Rossi may have scammed investors. That is
defamation. You
  don't know if he has any investors, do you? You
don't know
   how he
  raised his funding do you? Well he did that by selling a
   business
  and selling his house.

  AG

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

That is the point. Rossi committed no act of scamming, so claiming Rossi 
had scammed is the act of defamation with intent to cause loss of 
reputation.


AG


On 11/12/2011 3:29 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:
Would you give me a practical example? I just cannot understand how 
can someone lose reputation with something it doesn't exist.


2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>


Defamation is the act of making a false statements with the intent
to cause loss of reputation plus a few more. Suggesting to someone
that the statement they just made may be defamatory, in no way
supports the defamatory statement.

AG



On 11/12/2011 2:57 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

But you cannot say that is defamatory if there is no investors.

    2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>>


   I cautioned that making statements of scamming investors, when
   those statement can not be proven, is defamation. My
statements in
   no way give support to those making scamming statements.

   AG



   On 11/12/2011 2:41 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

   You answer to someone as you were acknowledging such fact.

           2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>

<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>>>


  Ka? I never said Rossi was looking for investors or had
   any. From
  what I have read he doesn't need them and has self
funded this
  project.

  AG



  On 11/12/2011 2:26 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

  Aussie Guy, if you keep insisting that Rossi asked
   around for
  investors, you are provoking troll attacks,
because you are
  creating a strawman for Rossi. Thus, you are helping
   with the
              mess around here.

  2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>

<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com
<mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>>>>


 Mary you just do not get it do you? You can't
go around
  saying you
 think Rossi may have scammed investors. That is
   defamation. You
 don't know if he has any investors, do you? You
   don't know
  how he
 raised his funding do you? Well he did that
by selling a
  business
 and selling his house.

 AG

[Vo]:New E-Cat customers to reveal their identity

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

http://www.leonardo-ecat.com/fp/News/Upcoming/index.html


 "Next Few Months

 * New customers of the one megawatt E-Cat plant reveal their identity
   publicly.
 * Location of first E-Cat factory in the United States revealed."

Re: [Vo]:New E-Cat customers to reveal their identity

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

The web site belongs to Leonardo Corp. It matters not who wrote the 
words as long as they are the words of the web site owner. You again 
attempt to cast into doubt credibility of Rossi and statements made on 
the Leonardo web site by involving the credibility of an unknown writer.


Mary you do this all over the internet, so you have more than a passing 
interest in making unprovable negative statement in what appears to be a 
effort to cause Rossi and his E-Cat to lose credibility. May I ask why 
you are putting so much effort into this? What do you have to gain by 
doing this?


Do you understand what a "Fair Go" means?

As for the web site statement below, I believe it will happen because it 
is on the official Rossi web site. The man met his end of Oct 2011 1 MW 
demo date. Maybe that means nothing to you but to me as a engineer it 
says volumes about meeting deadlines and meeting customer expectations, 
especially with new technology.


AG


On 11/12/2011 5:49 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:



"Next Few Months

 * New customers of the one megawatt E-Cat plant reveal their identity
  publicly.
 * Location of first E-Cat factory in the United States revealed."


And why do you believe that will happen?  Because Sterling Allan wrote 
it?  He's the same guy who had Obama in Mars for Cripes' sake!

Re: [Vo]:Andrea rossi: This is not yet our official website

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Here we agree Mary. Both Sterling and Rossi must wear the cost of this 
stuff-up.


AG


On 11/13/2011 2:59 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:

Latest Rossi-ism:

 *
Andrea Rossi
November 12th, 2011 at 8:57 AM



WARNING: THE WEBSITE http://WWW.LEONARDO-ECAT.COM
 IS NOT OUR WEBSITE. IT HAS NOT
BEEN APPROVED, IT IS A DRAFT OF A PROPOSAL WHOSE TEXT HAS TO BE
CONTROLLED, APPROVED. WE ASKED TO THE INFORMATIC WHO PROPOSED IT
TO PUT IT IMMEDIATELY OUT OF THE NET, BECAUSE IT CONTAINS
SUBSTANTIAL ERRORS, WRONG NAMES IN WRONG PLACES :SPECIFICALLY, ALL
THE NAMES PUT IN THE PAGE “BONA FIDE” ARE TOTALLY WRONG AND SUCH
NAMES HAVE NOT TO BE PUT IN THAT POST.
WARM REGARDS,
ANDREA ROSSI

http://www.journal-of-nuclear-physics.com/?p=510#comments

Good old Sterling and Hank apparently not only jumped the shark but 
also screwed the pooch!

Re: [Vo]:Rossi E-Cat web site up

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Like everything I build it was a work in progress and was continually 
evolving. The switch panel went when I got an old teletype. Was so 
excited that I had a printer and real keyboard. The system code was then 
about 1 k. The last work I did on that system involved designing in a 
video terminal as my human interface with the main system of 64k of 
dynamic ram using 1 x 16k chips and a Z80 processor. Thought the string 
transfer op on the Z80 was fantastic. Even had a programmable character 
generator so I could do graphics. I wrote my own version of CPM and 
actually sold a few systems to friends. Back then 64k of ram, a 4 MHz 
Z80 and a 5 MB hard drive was all that was needed to run everything a 
small business needed, word processing (WordStar), spreadsheet (VisiCalc 
I think) and a data base program for accounting. Then Bill Gates came 
along and changed everything.


AG


On 11/13/2011 5:40 AM, Dr Joe Karthauser wrote:

On 12 Nov 2011, at 01:39, Aussie Guy E-Cat  wrote:


Nothing wrong with old programmers and old engineers. Cut by first code on a 
8008 system that I designed and built. Had a whole 256 bytes of ram. Put the 
program in with switches. Now that is old code.


Do you still have it? I'm sure that although I've still got the physical 
artefacts of old programmes I wrote when I was a kid, the patterns are long 
gone.

Joe

Re: [Vo]:New E-Cat customers to reveal their identity

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

It matters not who the web site administrator is or who typed the text 
on the pages. The web site is owned by Leonardo Corp, it is their 
official web site and any pages there are approved and binding on that 
corporation.


So stop with the Sterling references. It does not matter and has no 
bearing on the official statements made on the web site by Leonardo corp.


AG


On 11/12/2011 7:28 PM, Jouni Valkonen wrote:

Aussie, I too have hard time to think what could be the motivation for
Mary to do what she is doing, because there could not be any positive
outcome for her. If eCat is for real, like it seems to be, then Mary
just loses all the credibility and is required to change her name if
she is ever going to appear in the Internet again.

And if she is right, then she has just wasted countless of hours for
debunking something that did not have any interest for anyone (expect
for few free energy crackpots, who believe that Barak has visited in
Mars). So, no matter what is the outcome, she has already spoiled her
reputation.

However, I think that here Mary is right. It seems that the site and
content was fully produced by Sterling and Hank, and Andrea has only
approved the half baked concept. This indicates that there seems not
to be any first hand information in the site, but everything is taken
from Andrea's public comments, PES wiki or third party public sources.

That upcoming event was just put there because Andrea has perhaps
suggested that production facilities and associates are revealed on
time, very soon.

For example, very relevant upcoming event is also the start of
research program with University Bologna and Uppsala. But this was not
included, because there are no public sources that would give even a
hint when it actually begins for real.

Right now any information that the site contained must be considered
with similar respect than to information that is contained in
PES-wiki. That is, that the information is purely fan produced. Right
now it is official fan page for eCat, that does not include first hand
information. But things may change if/when Andrea is taking more
public approach and reveals more background information on Leonardo
Corp, EON Srl and E-Cat.

I think that Andrea has seriously considered to hire Sterling his
official webmaster and some sort of information representative. (This
is of course pure speculation)

 –Jouni


2011/11/12 Aussie Guy E-Cat:

The web site belongs to Leonardo Corp. It matters not who wrote the words as
long as they are the words of the web site owner. You again attempt to cast
into doubt credibility of Rossi and statements made on the Leonardo web site
by involving the credibility of an unknown writer.

Mary you do this all over the internet, so you have more than a passing
interest in making unprovable negative statement in what appears to be a
effort to cause Rossi and his E-Cat to lose credibility. May I ask why you
are putting so much effort into this? What do you have to gain by doing
this?

Do you understand what a "Fair Go" means?

As for the web site statement below, I believe it will happen because it is
on the official Rossi web site. The man met his end of Oct 2011 1 MW demo
date. Maybe that means nothing to you but to me as a engineer it says
volumes about meeting deadlines and meeting customer expectations,
especially with new technology.

AG


On 11/12/2011 5:49 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:


"Next Few Months

 * New customers of the one megawatt E-Cat plant reveal their identity
  publicly.
 * Location of first E-Cat factory in the United States revealed."


And why do you believe that will happen?  Because Sterling Allan wrote it?
  He's the same guy who had Obama in Mars for Cripes' sake!

[Vo]:NI-H cell replication, some thoughts

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

While considering the fabrication of my Ni-H cell, several points 
concerning the Door Knob Rossi LENR reactor have come to light.


1) Rossi used a wrap around external heater to bring the core up to 
operational temperature.


2) This external heater could not be the source of the necessary 
electrons needed to create the H- ions needed to be captured by the Ni 
atoms.


3) He would need another naked, so to speak, element heater to boil off 
the electrons needed to form the H- ions, once they were broken apart 
from the supplied H2.


4) Vacuum tubes do this by using a thermionic emissive coating on the 
cathode tube structure surrounding the heater element.


5) In vacuum tubes a positive charge on the plate causes the electrons 
to leave the cathode and to travel to the plate.


6) Rossi may be using a voltage difference between his cathode and the 
Ni powder to control electron availability and to control the reaction.


6) He seems to have the ability to disable sections of the 3 core 
reactor assembly.


Maybe Rossi's catalysis is nothing more than a selected thermionic 
emissive coating on a thin metal tube surrounding the electron source 
buried deep in the heart of each of his reactor cores?


This may imply that his "Frequencies" are a variable pulse width, 
selected polarity, signal that can increase the effective release of 
electrons from the cathode with a positive polarity pulse train or 
retard them with a negative polarity pulse train. This would make it 
relatively simple to control the strength / heat gain of the reaction.


In the middle of the heater power wire feed module, there is a removable 
plug that may allow Rossi to disable selected reactor cores by using a 
small 3 pole slide switch block that may be accessible behind that plug. 
See attached photo.


Comments?
<>

Re: [Vo]:Hypothetical diagram of the Oct. 28th E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I believe Rossi or someone said the genset was rated at 300 kva and they 
had a spare on site, in case the prime genset failed.


AG


On 11/13/2011 4:44 PM, Berke Durak wrote:

After watching the available footage and looking at the pictures of
the Oct. 28th demo, I have
just drawn a diagram of the system as I think it was that day.

http://i.imgur.com/Ipn7W.png

Please report any inaccuracies or misuse of engineering symbols.

Re: [Vo]:Hypothetical diagram of the Oct. 28th E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

That is interesting as I'm sure I read / heard they were both 300 kva 
gensets. There should be power and control cables going into the E-Cat 
container.


AG


On 11/13/2011 4:55 PM, Berke Durak wrote:

On Sun, Nov 13, 2011 at 1:20 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
  wrote:


I believe Rossi or someone said the genset was rated at 300 kva and
they had a spare on site, in case the prime genset failed.

I see only one genset in the pictures: the big orange one that is
visible in the video available on Youtube.  It has a sticker that
reads "Altertecno 450 KVA".  I can add another 300 KVA genset for
version 2.

Re: [Vo]:Cold fusion, heat from primary energy consumption, and global warming

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

120,000 TWs reaches the surface of the planet according to: 
http://www.sc.doe.gov/bes/reports/files/SEU_rpt.pdf


"The solar availability at the top of the atmosphere is 170,000 TW, of 
which 120,000 TW strikes the Earth (the

remainder being scattered by the atmosphere and clouds)."

AG


On 11/15/2011 2:02 PM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

mailto:mix...@bigpond.com>> wrote:

This figure is too high. The amount intercepted by the Earth is 5
million quads
per annum above the atmosphere, and then some of this is directly
reflected back
into space by cloud cover.


Where did you get that info?

I looked all around for that. I found that one site that expresses the 
number in quads, and it seemed to compare to the others that show the 
value in different units.


http://www.ecoworld.com/energy-fuels/how-much-solar-energy-hits-earth.html

Is there a more authoritative and detailed site than this?

Most of them discuss solar insolation in units such as square meters 
for various locations. That is needed for solar energy planning. They 
do not include a planet-wide analysis. You cannot extrapolate from 
local insolation given the extremes at the poles.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:Rossi ecat website - confused

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

It is not a good state of affairs. I did advise Rossi, via his blog to 
take the site off line, which he said he was doing. I can't see how 
Sterling can claim this is a work in progress E-Cat web site that is not 
authorized by Rossi.  As had been pointed out, the URL is owned by Rossi.


AG


On 11/15/2011 6:19 PM, peter.heck...@arcor.de wrote:

Hi,

According to the WHOIS database the domain leonardo-ecat.com is owned by Andrea 
Rossi.

Sterling Allan publishes content there that is not approved by Andrea Rossi.
He re-publishes content that was previously removed on request by Rossi.

Because Rossi is the legal owner of the domain, I must assume that anything 
published there, is tolerated by Rossi and welcome to Rossi. There is no other 
explanation.
I also believe, Rossi is legally responsible for anything published there.

Im confused. What does this mean?

Peter

Re: [Vo]:Rossi ecat website - confused

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

It just got worst:
http://pesn.com/2011/11/15/9601957_Sterling_Allan_on_the_up_and_down_of_Rossis_approval_of_Leonardo-ECat.com/

The web site is registered to Rossi. Sterling can't just take it over. I 
did email Rossi that he should insist the web site be take down it if 
was not there with his approval. Apparently he asked Sterling to do just 
that but Sterling has apparently refused to follow Rossi's request.


Andrea Rossi, if you read this forum, as I believe you do, take that web 
site down as it is not helping to tell your story. Do not let Sterling 
or any body else hijack your story. It is your to tell.


AG


On 11/16/2011 1:33 AM, David Roberson wrote:
Peter, Rossi may have given Allan too much poetic freedom.  Rossi is a 
busy man and apparently does not have time to critic the site as well 
as he would like.

Dave


-Original Message-
From: peter.heckert 
To: vortex-l 
Sent: Tue, Nov 15, 2011 2:52 am
Subject: [Vo]:Rossi ecat website - confused

Hi,

According to the WHOIS database the domain leonardo-ecat.com is owned by Andrea
Rossi.

Sterling Allan publishes content there that is not approved by Andrea Rossi.
He re-publishes content that was previously removed on request by Rossi.

Because Rossi is the legal owner of the domain, I must assume that anything
published there, is tolerated by Rossi and welcome to Rossi. There is no other
explanation.
I also believe, Rossi is legally responsible for anything published there.

Im confused. What does this mean?

Peter

Re: [Vo]:Temperature Control in E-Cat Self-sustained Mode

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I would really like to see what the screen on top of the PLC was 
displaying. All the answers to our engineering control questions could 
be on that screen. It sure looks like the box was very full of controls 
of various types and kinds.


AG


On 11/17/2011 2:30 AM, Rich Murray wrote:

Nice to see a polite discussion that reaches agreements...

On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 7:56 AM, James Bowery > wrote:


Ooops... my intuition screwed up on this one:

Since the effective specific heat does not remain constant with
temperature -- there is a discontinuous rise at the boiling point
-- there is a dramatic rise in the effective heat transport with
temperature at the boiling point (whatever it is for the pressure
in the reaction vessel).

That's all that's required for temperature control.  Rossi's
effort required to achieve self-sustained mode then would have
been to ensure that the flow rate around the reactor vessel was in
the range where it is low enough not to quench the reaction in the
1deg/gm/calorie regime, but high enough that in the regime where
its some huge number the reactor reaches an equilibrium with the
heat transport.

I plead lack of sleep.

Re: [Vo]:Steam Quality Revisted -- Kettle Boiler

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Downloaded the document ok. All there.

AG


On 11/20/2011 1:57 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:

Good news : I found the link.Legacy Image - Scan to PDF
http://ntrs.nasa.gov/archive/nasa/casi.ntrs.nasa.gov/19710004292_1971004292.pdf

Bad news ... the file's corrupted, and only shows about a quarter of the document on one 
of my systems (not this one!). Download fails, and adobe says "file corrupted, can't 
repair".

The formula was phonetically similar to Cronin ..

- Original Message -

I have a link somewhere for this  (There's a named formula).

Re: [Vo]:Steam Quality Revisted -- Kettle Boiler

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

It is 11.8 MBs. Sending in the next email.

AG


On 11/20/2011 2:10 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:

Weird ... can you search for surface tension/drops 
(It's probably to big to email ... but could you give it a try.  This address)
- Original Message -

Downloaded the document ok. All there.

Re: [Vo]:Steam Quality Revisted -- Kettle Boiler

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Sent. Shall I also send to your direct email?

AG


On 11/20/2011 2:10 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:

Weird ... can you search for surface tension/drops 
(It's probably to big to email ... but could you give it a try.  This address)
- Original Message -

Downloaded the document ok. All there.

Re: [Vo]:Steam Quality Revisted -- Kettle Boiler

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Send to Vortex failed. Sending directly to your email.

AG


On 11/20/2011 2:10 PM, Alan Fletcher wrote:

Weird ... can you search for surface tension/drops 
(It's probably to big to email ... but could you give it a try.  This address)
- Original Message -

Downloaded the document ok. All there.

Re: [Vo]:How should I demonstrate LENR, if I can reproduce it?

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

On 11/20/2011 2:30 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
What Rossi could do would be twofold.  First, ally himself with some 
deep pockets.


Deep pockets? How much deeper can you get but the military? Who Rossi 
now claims bought the first and the next 13 x 1 MW E-Cat plants. I doubt 
the military would wish to see Rossi's trade secrets becoming public 
knowledge. They can easily take control of any patent Rossi has or will 
have.


Given a convincing demo in the course of a "due diligence" 
examination, that should be easy.


I suggest he did that on 28 Oct 2011 via the test conducted by the NATO 
Colonel.


AG

Re: [Vo]:Steam Quality Revisted -- Kettle Boiler

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Thanks for that tip. It is done: 
https://docs.google.com/open?id=0B__Wi_DF2CjJM2Y2Mjc4YTQtNjliNC00OGMxLWI5NTAtNWY0NzUyNWU1MTQ5


AG


On 11/20/2011 2:37 PM, Terry Blanton wrote:

On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 11:04 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat
  wrote:

Send to Vortex failed. Sending directly to your email.

Vortex is limited to a 40 kByte file size.  Yahoo will allow 10 Mbyte
attachments or larger if you use their new mailer.  You can load it up
to your documents file on Google docs.google.com and send a link.

T

Re: [Vo]:How should I demonstrate LENR, if I can reproduce it?

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Mary, I have a nice infinite COP device in my pocket to show you. I 
produces electricity from no known energy source. That is as long as you 
forget about the discovery of the photovoltaic effect in 1839. Ok, I 
agree that in 2011 the device will not meet your requirements. BUT in 
1838 it would have. Same physics, just in 1838 we did not know that we 
knew in 1839. Today with LENR we have a different dog (PV effect / LENR) 
but with the same leg action (lack of understanding of why and how it 
works).


AG


On 11/20/2011 3:02 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

OK, deal :)

2011/11/20 Mary Yugo mailto:maryyu...@gmail.com>>


OK, so you say.  If you come up with something, I would be more
than delighted to help you test it so nobody with an IQ > 10 can
deny it's real.  And I can find you a Daddy Warbucks too if you
need one.  But please, first make something that makes a decent
COP with acceptable power input or better yet no power in at all. 
And make sure it runs a few weeks with very little overall volume

and using only tiny amount of fuel.  Then, we'll talk.  I'll
gladly give up my anonymity if you have something like that in
your pocket.

Re: [Vo]:How should I demonstrate LENR, if I can reproduce it?

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

All you have are your straw man argument. Where is your proof that the 
colonel was not who Rossi said he was and that Rossi lied when he 
recently said the original purchaser was military and has now purchased 
a further 13 x 1MW plants. With Rossi we have photos of hardware, 
videos, data, first hand reports, peoples names, history of other tests, 
etc. With you all we have is an internet alias and your straw man claims.


AG


On 11/20/2011 3:06 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 8:17 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


On 11/20/2011 2:30 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:

What Rossi could do would be twofold.  First, ally himself
with some deep pockets.


Deep pockets? How much deeper can you get but the military? 



I agree.  If the military bought it and repeated the buy, I'd believe 
it's real.  The military isn't reliable for due diligence the first 
time around.  The US military bought $8K worth of Sniffex explosive 
detectors to test even though they are dowsing rods.  And the Iraqi 
military bought $60 million's worth until it became an international 
scandal resulting in several arrests.  But if the US military bought 
it and liked it, I'd be convinced.


The problem is that there is not a shred of evidence to lead anyone to 
believe that any military bought anything from Rossi.  If you have 
some, please share it.


Who Rossi now claims bought the first and the next 13 x 1 MW E-Cat
plants. I doubt the military would wish to see Rossi's trade
secrets becoming public knowledge. They can easily take control of
any patent Rossi has or will have.


I suppose the military can temporarily suppress patents where release 
would affect national security in a profound way but I think the 
history of it is that it's not a possibility that has been used very 
much and when it has, it was brief.


Given a convincing demo in the course of a "due diligence"
examination, that should be easy.

I suggest he did that on 28 Oct 2011 via the test conducted by the
NATO Colonel.


Oh my.  You fell for that claim line, hook and sinker.  How do you 
know the Italian dude with the mustache (Fioravanti was it?) was a 
NATO colonel exactly?  Have you seen his military ID?  And if he was 
such a person, especially but not necessarily retired, could he not 
still be also on Rossi's payroll for a little while?

Re: [Vo]:How should I demonstrate LENR, if I can reproduce it?

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I'm currently working on a design but have not yet started building. I'm 
going small as I do respect what could happen if I get a run away and 
can't shut it down quickly. I fully understand what others have said 
about Rossi when they saw the 18 hour test cell hit 123 kWs. I would not 
want to be anywhere near that cell if it really ran away. 123 kWs is a 
LOT of heat. Happy to discuss your ideas and needs.


AG


On 11/20/2011 3:14 PM, Daniel Rocha wrote:

Are you interested in building an ecat? You could help me.

2011/11/20 Aussie Guy E-Cat <mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>>


Mary, I have a nice infinite COP device in my pocket to show you.
I produces electricity from no known energy source. That is as
long as you forget about the discovery of the photovoltaic effect
in 1839. Ok, I agree that in 2011 the device will not meet your
requirements. BUT in 1838 it would have. Same physics, just in
1838 we did not know that we knew in 1839. Today with LENR we have
a different dog (PV effect / LENR) but with the same leg action
(lack of understanding of why and how it works).

AG

Re: [Vo]:How should I demonstrate LENR, if I can reproduce it?

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Proof? Rossi and his agents are taking orders. No money paid until 
delivery and your engineers have certified it meets the agreed claims. 
The only scam is in your straw man statements. You claim to have money 
or access to money. All you need do is to place an order (Rossi has said 
he will go down to a 100 kW plant, so USD200k is all you need to come up 
with) and report to all the world how that process goes. But do you do 
that? Apparently not as it seems you enjoy playing at being a straw man 
on just about every E-Cat discussion forum on the net (which begs the 
question, is there more than one Mary Yugo straw man on the net?), 
instead of putting your money where you mouth is and engaging the 
process of ordering a thermal plant from Rossi.


AG


On 11/20/2011 3:34 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Sat, Nov 19, 2011 at 8:51 PM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


All you have are your straw man argument. Where is your proof that
the colonel was not who Rossi said he was and that Rossi lied when
he recently said the original purchaser was military and has now
purchased a further 13 x 1MW plants.


Ah.  It's the person making the claim that needs to provide the 
proof.  Rossi is making the claims. I am only asking some relevant 
questions.  Rossi has a poor track record with two previous tech 
failures and some say, criminal activity.  Also he was convicted -- I 
know he debates the merit of the charges.  But that's enough that I 
won't believe that he has an anonymous client without the ability to 
check and his next 13 sales are equally uncheckable.


With Rossi we have photos of hardware, videos, data, first hand
reports, peoples names, history of other tests, etc.


I don't find the evidence you cite adequate to prove that Rossi's 
device works by cold fusion and is in fact a nuclear reactor.  But I 
won't rehash why again -- out of compassion for the other readers.


With you all we have is an internet alias and your straw man claims.


All you have is an internet alias with many people.  It isn't 
convenient to verify anyone's identity on an email list, "Aussie Guy 
E-cat".  I don't suppose that's your real name, is it?  Anyway it's 
irrelevant who I am because I am not saying anything I ask you to 
believe because I say it.  Rossi is.  And we know his record.


Straw man claims?  Which ones exactly are those?

If you have proof that Rossi has a client and that the "colonel" works 
for that client and that Rossi has sold 13 plants to some military, 
I'm happy to look at it.  If not, I maintain you don't know that it is 
a fact.

[Vo]:Help in testing a E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I have just emailed Rossi with my interest in purchasing a 100 kW E-Cat 
plant. I do thank Vortex members (on the forum and privately) for 
providing the behind the scenes insight into the history of LENR that 
helped to make this decision happen. My bags are ready to be packed, 
funds locked down and I'm ready to fly to Bologna to see and test a 
E-Cat reactor. What I didn't know or were a bit rusty about in measuring 
a E-Cat has been provided by the excellent Vortex forum.


My intention is to pay the funds into a Escrow account, request a test 
of a single E-Cat and if that is found to be OK, to proceed to pre 
delivery testing the 100 kW plant. Failure of either test to meet a min 
COP 6 result would trigger the return of all my Escrowed funds.


I would appreciate suggestions as to the necessary equipment (manuf and 
model) you would suggest I would need to make the initial single E-Cat 
test measurements. I do have many thermocouples and DVMs with temp 
ranges but no flow meters. Does anybody know the manuf and model of the 
heat exchanger used in the 6 Oct demo as I plan to use that setup to do 
the delta T measurements. I do plan on taking a 16 channel data logger 
and digital oscilloscope (both battery powered) to check the input 
energy in ALL the wires going into the E-Cat.


From what I have read here, the 2 temp probes should be inserted 
through the wall of the water hose feeding the heat exchanges enough so 
they are approx central to the water flow, while not touching the inside 
wall of the water hose and likewise for the outlet water hose. Is a  45 
deg insertion angle acceptable?


AG

Re: [Vo]:To Aussie Guy - Please request a control E-Cat to be used!

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I doubt that would work as the "control" E-Cat may have been preloaded 
with H2, either in the processing of the powder or in the initial 
operational testing. I will ask if this is possible.


AG


On 11/20/2011 5:48 PM, noone noone wrote:

Hello,

Congrats on being able to test an E-Cat.

I would like to request that you utilize two, single modules in the 
test. One with hydrogen, and another without hydrogen. The one with no 
hydrogen would be the control. You would input electrical power into 
the control just like you would the normal E-Cat. However, without 
hydrogen after the input is turned off the output should drop, but the 
actual E-Cat should keep producing output power. This is the test that 
would destroy the ridiculous argument about thermal inertia and 
thermal flywheel.


This is the test that would shut up many of the cynics, and bring some 
of the honest skeptics off the fence.


Please perform this test in addition to the ordinary calorimeter test.

Thanks.

Re: [Vo]:Help in testing a E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I intend to use a digital flow rate monitor, inserted into the intake 
water hose. The data logger will record 16 input and output data points 
every 100 ms or finer if necessary. Amazing what GB memories can do. 
Thanks for the lower flow rate and use of a bucket / basin for secondary 
checking suggestion. Always nice to double check the digitals, being an 
OLD analog (magazine and technology) man who, when first touching a 
CK722 transistor, said WTF?


AG


On 11/20/2011 5:51 PM, Robert Leguillon wrote:

For the secondary water flow, use a lower flow rate, creating a higher delta T. 
Then, the output flow can be diverted into any basin (and periodically 
emptied), with the temperature measured there. You could use a thermocouple 
inside of the input water flow for measure, but keep a disconnect in the line 
to double-check (by emptying some into a basin as well)

Aussie Guy E-Cat  wrote:


I have just emailed Rossi with my interest in purchasing a 100 kW E-Cat
plant. I do thank Vortex members (on the forum and privately) for
providing the behind the scenes insight into the history of LENR that
helped to make this decision happen. My bags are ready to be packed,
funds locked down and I'm ready to fly to Bologna to see and test a
E-Cat reactor. What I didn't know or were a bit rusty about in measuring
a E-Cat has been provided by the excellent Vortex forum.

My intention is to pay the funds into a Escrow account, request a test
of a single E-Cat and if that is found to be OK, to proceed to pre
delivery testing the 100 kW plant. Failure of either test to meet a min
COP 6 result would trigger the return of all my Escrowed funds.

I would appreciate suggestions as to the necessary equipment (manuf and
model) you would suggest I would need to make the initial single E-Cat
test measurements. I do have many thermocouples and DVMs with temp
ranges but no flow meters. Does anybody know the manuf and model of the
heat exchanger used in the 6 Oct demo as I plan to use that setup to do
the delta T measurements. I do plan on taking a 16 channel data logger
and digital oscilloscope (both battery powered) to check the input
energy in ALL the wires going into the E-Cat.

 From what I have read here, the 2 temp probes should be inserted
through the wall of the water hose feeding the heat exchanges enough so
they are approx central to the water flow, while not touching the inside
wall of the water hose and likewise for the outlet water hose. Is a  45
deg insertion angle acceptable?

AG

Re: [Vo]:How should I demonstrate LENR, if I can reproduce it?

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Well I do hope he will sell a 100 kW plant to me.

AG


On 11/20/2011 5:39 PM, Charles Hope wrote:

Rossi said he'd sell to anybody except the military.

On Nov 19, 2011, at 23:17, Aussie Guy E-Cat  wrote:


On 11/20/2011 2:30 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:

What Rossi could do would be twofold.  First, ally himself with some deep 
pockets.

Deep pockets? How much deeper can you get but the military? Who Rossi now 
claims bought the first and the next 13 x 1 MW E-Cat plants.

Re: [Vo]:Help in testing a E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I have always been a Black Box kind of guy and approached problem 
solving in a binary divide and conquer approach. That way you make 
little assumptions and just go with what the test data shows as the 
incorrect or correct pathway.


I fully expect to sign a NDA and to put money into an Escrow account 
when we agree on the test protocols for the initial E-Cat test and for 
the final plant test. Under those conditions Rossi should agree to any 
test I ask for as when I take delivery I can do anything that I like in 
the way of testing. I'm under no illusions as to what I may find as I 
100% know this is a heavy work in progress product. Just look at the 
E-Cats inside the container to those on the roof. Here I assume the roof 
top mounted units are a later build as they appear to have a different 
tubing and wiring connection system than the internal units, which were 
installed earlier. I expect the current E-Cat module build is different 
to any we have seen. One thing you can say about Rossi is he does not 
spend much time sitting in his chair.


Well stirred buckets of water and long glass thermometers work well. 
Then diving into the digital pool, my digital scope does area under the 
square power measurements. I'll also be checking earth currents to be 
sure there are no injected currents happening there as well as 
monitoring the "Frequencies". Sure this will all be under NDA, but I 
have every right as a customer with money in a Escrow account to do 
every test I deem necessary. I can assure you, when the 100 kW plant 
arrives in OZ, even more testing will be done as I'm sure Rossi knows 
will happen.


What I can report I will but I do respect NDAs and Commercial in 
Confidence arrangements.


AG


On 11/20/2011 6:19 PM, Robert Leguillon wrote:

The critical point is to properly treat it as a "black box".  Don't get 
distracted with E-Cat temperature, pressure, etc. You can take additional data points, 
but don't rely on any measurements taken from INSIDE Rossi's system.
What you NEED:
You need good-and-proper input power measurements (logged voltage and a 
thru-line ammeter, if possible), secondary water flow, and higher secondary 
delta T (again, I'd use bucket-diversions to double-check your thermocouples).
If you get those data points reliably, then you just need sufficient time to 
rule out chemical energy. If you have a choice, test it in a driven mode, 
without any of the self-sustaining B.S.

I sincerely wish you the best, but I'd wager good money that he would not allow 
such definitive testing. Let us know what you find out.

Re: [Vo]:Help in testing a E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Amazing statements. Again with no basis in fact. Just more straw man 
totally negative spin stuff. I've been a power system engineer for 
probably longer than you have been alive. I do know how to construct a 
test of the E-Cat. I have also been used by several patent attorneys and 
investor groups around Australia to devise tests for OU devices, which I 
should add the inventors never agreed to.


What information I can share as I move through the process I will share. 
However that is not the intent of the process. My intent is to make 
money from the E-Cat.


AG


On 11/20/2011 6:59 PM, Mary Yugo wrote:
I'm with Robert L.  I don't think you will ever be offered a test.  
But if you are, I'll be happy to talk with you by phone and make very 
detailed suggestions for making sure your tests are valid --if you'd 
like.


The first and foremost suggestion is to allow Rossi to supply NOTHING 
except the E-cat and maybe the frequency generator whatever that is-- 
ABSOLUTELY NOTHING.  I can't emphasize that too much.


You will need to plan for your own power supply (Rossi to supply 
specifications), power input measuring equipment, coolant circuit -- 
keep it liquid-- no steam, no heat exchanger-- and all your own flow 
meters and temperature measuring devices. More details if you actually 
get a scheduled appointment for the test-- as much detail as you 
need.  YOU not Rossi will need to decide how long to run and you will 
need enough people to make sure it goes several days or more.


I was tempted to do this myself (order a 100 kW machine) but I don't 
really need to tie up $200K for a long time and I don't think Rossi is 
really selling the E-cats.


One interesting detail -- what is the "frequencies" device and who 
provides that but it doesn't matter where that comes from as long as 
you check what's in it, and most of all, it's electrical power 
consumption.


Good going.  I hope you get an E-cat.  I doubt that you will.

Re: [Vo]:How should I demonstrate LENR, if I can reproduce it?

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I'm happy to replicate the 6 Oct 2011 test setup. In fact I'll insist on 
it as then I know what to expect. I'll bring temp, water flow and power 
input monitoring equipment, plus the digital cro and the data logger. 
I'm not initially interested in self sustain mode but will insist on at 
least 24 hours or as long as I can stay awake powered mode measurements 
that show a min COP 6. I should be able to stay awake for at least 48 
hours with good Italian Short Blacks.


AG


On 11/20/2011 8:02 PM, Peter Heckert wrote:

Am 20.11.2011 02:28, schrieb Daniel Rocha:
Suppose I can do it, just like Rossi claims. I dont want to have to 
leave home nor have to heat tons of water. What should I do? 

The problem is to make the energy visible.

Heat a known amount of water in an open vaporizer.
Let the steam go out of the window or do it under a cooker hood in the 
kitchen.


Or: Melt a known amount of ice or wax.

Re: [Vo]:Defkalion GT interview with tovima.gr

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Sounds like a war for LENR customers has started and in any war truth is 
the first causality. Nothing like competition to quickly bring LENR 
devices to the boil, so to speak. Wonder when the Piantelli Group, the 
Americans and the Japanese will jump into the LENR pot? I bet not long. 
I like the sound of that pot boiling with many LENR companies driving 
the $ / Watt lower and lower.


AG


On 11/20/2011 9:53 PM, David ledin wrote:

Defkalion GT interview with tovima.gr

We not only continue our program and we are almost ready, with
technology that precedes that of Rossi during a year. Specifically,
within the next 15 days there will be announcements and initiated
testing and certification by independent third parties. We will
present the final product – not just a laboratory prototype – with all
its subsystems to operate according to European safety standards. ”

“All the technology used in devices Hyperion at the level of K W, and
systems 1 to 5M W is our own design – different from those of Rossi”
he replied.”As for the control, was already our own design and
construction, and Mr. Rossi has signed acceptance certificate shows
that it is ours. . However, the main and big difference in our device
than that of Rossi is that our system is stable in performance, while
that of Rossi or the last test failed to yield stable for more than
five and a half hours. ”

http://translate.google.com/translate?u=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.tovima.gr%2Fscience%2Farticle%2F%3Faid%3D430840&sl=el&tl=en&hl=&ie=UTF-8

Re: [Vo]:Help in testing a E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

A working and reliable product with back-up and support is everything. 
I'm a Black Box kind of guy who has been a engineer long enough to know 
that both devices are very early stage work in progress. I don't expect 
to see what I would see if I visited ABB or GE. Have opened up a channel 
to Defkalion.


This could be a good match with a diathermic oil based LENR heat 
generator: 
http://www.ge-energy.com/products_and_services/services/oil_and_gas_services/oregen.jsp


AG


On 11/20/2011 10:26 PM, Peter Heckert wrote:

Am 20.11.2011 09:47, schrieb Aussie Guy E-Cat:
Amazing statements. Again with no basis in fact. Just more straw man 
totally negative spin stuff. I've been a power system engineer for 
probably longer than you have been alive. I do know how to construct 
a test of the E-Cat. I have also been used by several patent 
attorneys and investor groups around Australia to devise tests for OU 
devices, which I should add the inventors never agreed to.


What information I can share as I move through the process I will 
share. However that is not the intent of the process. My intent is to 
make money from the E-Cat.
Remember Henry Ford. He had the philosophy that making money is second 
priority.

First make a working product.
Then sell it and make money.

Possibly contact Defkalion. They write they will accept all tests 
demanded by the customer.
With their current announcements, if true, the investment into Rossis 
technology could be a mistake, because he shows no willingness to do 
conclusive testing or cooperation on the technical aspects.


Peter

Re: [Vo]:Focardi talking about Gamma radiation.

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

More here: 
http://radio.rcdc.it/wp-content/uploads/Focardi-english-version.pdf


AG


On 11/20/2011 10:48 PM, Peter Heckert wrote:

In this TEDx event:


Focardi says, that no neutrons where observed.
Gamma radiation /not much above ambient level/ was observed.
So it seems they added the lead shield only for security, but not for 
protection and thermalization.


This conflicts with Rossis statement that gamma radiation is 
thermalized in the lead shield.
Gamma rays not much above ambient level cannot contribute a measurable 
amount of thermal energy.


Peter

Re: [Vo]:Focardi talking about Gamma radiation.

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

You did read Focardi's comments on the radiation and the transmutations:

"/*So, if gamma [radiation] is emitted in one direction, the nickel goes 
in the opposite direction, like a cannon recoiling when it is fired. 
Therefore nickel releases energy into the medium. And so does gamma — I 
mean that gamma, when it interacts, gives off its energy. But nickel 
does this in its immediate surroundings, so it does not travel very far. 
Thus, the excess energy in the copper -- copper, I’m speaking about 
copper -- is distributed to the medium, and the temperature of the 
medium rises, and this facilitates further problems, to the point that, 
once the process is primed, it keeps on going in like manner, and what 
happens is that nickel is turned into copper. In fact, we analyzed the 
material after it had been working for a long time and found copper in 
it. We went to Padova, where they have the appropriate instrument: we 
found copper. Copper has two isotopes, the ratio between the two is not 
in the concentration found in Nature, so we are not dealing with junk 
copper which has been added, it was produced by us in this manner. 
Therefore, we produced energy, we produced copper, and got to...*/"


As for repeatability, I have no problems with what Rossi and Focardi 
have achieved. If Rossi can get his reactor to fire up, he can teach me. 
I learn fast. This is almost like saying the small and hand made motors 
on the first Wright Flyer were not as reliable as a commercial steam 
engine of the same era. Of course not but what a difference when the 
Flyer's motors fired into life and the aircraft lifted off the ground. 
Never seen a steam engine do that. Then there is the scale of the 
development funds. Rossi claims to have spent over EUR1,000,000 of his 
own money on this so far. That would probably only pay for a good 
piss-up for the hot fusion guys and a new coat of paint.


AG


On 11/21/2011 1:24 AM, Peter Heckert wrote:

Am 20.11.2011 15:23, schrieb Aussie Guy E-Cat:
More here: 
http://radio.rcdc.it/wp-content/uploads/Focardi-english-version.pdf


Thank you. I have seen this before, but as an italian video with 
english subtitles on youtube.


There is something that most coldfusion researchers say and Focardi 
says it too:


He says, the "hot fusion guys" have not got /any/ results, but he has.
I believe this is a false exaggeration and a physics professor should 
not say this.

It is *untrue*.
If any cold fusion reseacher could present the results of hot 
fusionists it would be a worldwide sensation.
Of course the hot fusionists have /repeatable/ results in form of 
excess energy and nuclear reaction products and radiation. They get 
this for some millseconds at best, but/repeatable/.
What they dont have, is a sustained reaction and they have not reached 
an energetic breakeven point.
But if any CF researcher could present results as the hot fusionists 
already have, the reality of CF where already proven and accepted by 
mainstream.


Peter

Re: [Vo]:Focardi talking about Gamma radiation.

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Do you understand Italian? I don't and take that translation as being 
generally representative of what Focardi said but not what he actually 
said or in the context he said it. I have a lot of Italian friends and 
they talk more with their hands, face and gestures than their voice. 
Especially if they are taking the piss out on you (having fun at your 
expense) as I expect Focardi was doing with the hammer comment.


As for the hydrogen issue, I expect selling a home / commercial space 
heater than contains a bottle of pressurized Hydrogen might be a hard 
sell. Insurance companies would have to reassess their risk. I do agree 
with the Hydrogen association. Maybe a middle path is to use metal 
hydride storage?


AG


On 11/21/2011 1:59 AM, Peter Heckert wrote:

Am 20.11.2011 15:23, schrieb Aussie Guy E-Cat:
More here: 
http://radio.rcdc.it/wp-content/uploads/Focardi-english-version.pdf



I am a little bit concerned about his mental fitness:

[Female interviewer] And then how do you turn it off in hot weather?
(Laughs) At some point in the past, as the device kept working on and 
on, I started
thinking of a hammer. "Let’s hit it with a hammer!" (Laughs). Well, 
what you do is you
shut off ... the latest application has nickel inside it, then the 
hydrogen is supplied by
electrolysis, so that … because you cannot keep a hydrogen tank at 
home, of course, it’s

dangerous.

[Contrary to common belief, hydrogen is not more dangerous than
propangas. Both explode only when the right mixture is created.
Normally hydrogen doesnt explode, but burn. Propan gas is more
dangerous, because it is heavier than air. When there is a leak it
can sink to the ground and can make dangerous concentrations. This
doesnt happen with hydrogen. It is not toxic. It doesnt smell,
this does indeed increase the danger. I got this information
directly from the german hydrogen association]


Instead we generated it from water by electrolysis.
So, the device kept on working, and I thought to myself: "I guess I’m 
going to have to use
a hammer to stop it". Until one day Rossi told me “I stopped it!”. 
"And how did you do
that?". He said: "I cut the power to the electrolysis, obviously". 
Right! All you have to do is
run the electrolysis from a separate power source. You cut the power 
off there, and once

the hydrogen is used up, the device stops by itself.

Now why didnt he himself have the idea to switch the apparatus off?
This is the most obvious idea to try!

Re: [Vo]:Focardi talking about Gamma radiation.

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

Other papers I have read mentioned non natural Cu isotope ratios. 
However you suggestion may be a valid pathway, unless the H2 line is 
filtered against such fine metal dust.


AG


On 11/21/2011 2:25 AM, Peter Heckert wrote:

Am 20.11.2011 16:43, schrieb Aussie Guy E-Cat:

You did read Focardi's comments on the radiation and the transmutations:

We went to Padova, where they have the appropriate instrument: we 
found copper. Copper has two isotopes, the ratio between the two is 
not in the concentration found in Nature, so we are not dealing with 
junk copper which has been added, it was produced by us in this manner.

Again neither Rossi, nor other researchers have confirmed this.
Kullander & Essen found natural isotope distributions.

If the brass armatures are often opened and closed, this could be 
explained by metal dust blowed through the tubes and hoses.


Peter

[Vo]:To me, this is scary

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

To me this statement made by Professor Levi about the 18 hour test he 
and Rossi did is scary: 
http://www.nyteknik.se/nyheter/energi_miljo/energi/article3108242.ece
“/*Minimum power was 15 kilowatts, and that’s a conservative value. I 
calculated it several times. At night we did a measurement and the 
device then worked very stable and produced 20 kilowatts.”*/


/*“Now that I have seen the device work for so many hours, in my view 
all chemical energy sources are excluded,” said Giuseppe Levi.*/


/**He explained that this time* he chose to heat the water without 
boiling it, to avoid errors.*/


/**/

/*Initially, the temperature of the inflowing water was seven degrees 
Celsius and for a while the outlet temperature was 40 degrees Celsius. A 
flow rate of about one liter per second, equates to a peak power of 130 
kilowatts. The power output was later stabilized at 15 to 20 kilowatts.*/"


130 kWs of heat coming from something the size of a small door knob is 
really scary. No chemical source that I know of could have done that. 
Had I been there, I would have started to very quickly move well away. I 
sure Levi and Rossi needed to freshen up their Bonds briefs after that 
event, even if the COP was in the 100's.


AG

Re: [Vo]:How should I demonstrate LENR, if I can reproduce it?

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

My understanding is the coolant did, in Feb, go around the single Door 
Knob style reactor core but it no longer does. IE the heat radiation 
fins and the 3 cores embedded in lead. I have no real issues using a 
heat exchanger as long as I get a real time digital readout of the water 
flow rate into my data logger. As for the 6 Oct measurements, I do 
accept the engineers who measure this stuff all the time saying the 
measurements were close enough. I have looked at the videos and the data 
collected. I agree with them. My delta T temp probe placements will be 
in the middle of the water stream, inside the water hoses but not 
touching the inside wall of the water hose.


AG


On 11/21/2011 2:48 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


I'm happy to replicate the 6 Oct 2011 test setup. In fact I'll
insist on it as then I know what to expect. I'll bring temp, water
flow and power input monitoring equipment, plus the digital cro
and the data logger. I'm not initially interested in self sustain
mode but will insist on at least 24 hours or as long as I can stay
awake powered mode measurements that show a min COP 6. I should be
able to stay awake for at least 48 hours with good Italian Short
Blacks.


You should replicate Levi's February test method, using a simple 
liquid water (or glycol) coolant stream without making any steam.   
There is no way to know that the October 6 setup really measured the 
output heat correctly.  I won't repeat all the reasons why or the 
possible corrections again.

Re: [Vo]:Help in testing a E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

COP 6 powered mode. The first test I will request is of a single E-Cat 
module and then when the 100 kW plant is ready to roll out, return to do 
another test. I expect to learn a lot in the first test and will be 
better able to tailor the 100 kW test protocol. We are on the same page 
with the 25 deg C delta T for the first single E-Cat test. Hard to cock 
that up. Well lets hope so. The 100 kW test plant will be using 
diathermic oil, so we will fab up a recycling system with a similar, 
flow load wise, heat exchanger that we will use in Oz.


AG


On 11/21/2011 2:53 AM, David Roberson wrote:
Those are excellent suggestions.  One consideration about the flow 
rate.  Since you are ordering and I presume testing a 100 kW system, 
the delta temperature
will be many times larger than the one tested on October 6 at the rate 
used then.  I suggest that it would be wise to set the output flow 
rate to achieve a delta temperature
of say 20 to 30 C as the target.  We can assist you in determining the 
flow rate that should accomplish that goal ahead of time if you like.
Also, which power rating are you ordering from Rossi?  Is it the 
driven level or the self sustaining one?

Dave

Re: [Vo]:Help in testing a E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

As I stated, I have sent an introductory and request to purchase a 100 
kW plant email to i...@leonardocorp1996.com with details of the existing 
business structure and the proposed business model. I expect it will 
take several days to get an initial reply and to start the NDA / 
contract / agreed test conditions, etc negotiations. Oz just about 
totally shuts down over Christmas and New Years for at least 2 weeks. It 
is our summer break and no one is at work. So I expect I'm pushing it up 
a steep hill to expect to get over to Bologna before Christmas. But I 
may get lucky.


AG


On 11/21/2011 3:06 AM, Akira Shirakawa wrote:

On 2011-11-20 08:08, Aussie Guy E-Cat wrote:

I have just emailed Rossi with my interest in purchasing a 100 kW E-Cat
plant. [...]


Just to be clearer: have you only asked Rossi that you're interested 
in purchasing an E-Cat plant, or has he already replied back and 
agreed for a meeting?


Cheers,
S.A.

Re: [Vo]:A new article mostly about Defkalion in Greek

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

It says they had $15 million ready but Rossi did not complete the 
contract. That means they never paid Rossi the money and now they seem 
to be claiming the technology is all theirs.


"- *So the rift between you was not due only to non-payment of first 
installment repayment, said Mr. Rossi?*


/"Not sure./ /We had finished the 15 million dollars of first dose, but 
Mr. Rossi did not sign the protocol of receipt, asking him to meet 
parameters such as the stable operation of the device for at least 48 
hours./ /This was the real cause of the interruption of cooperation, but 
not celebrated in the media because they want to continue a deleterious 
confrontation./ /Us us interested in real progress, and this success./ 
/The technology will present a few days the world will be entirely Greek 
and appreciate its contribution to the overthrow of what exists in the 
energy market. "/"



AG


On 11/21/2011 3:22 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:

Original URL: http://www.tovima.gr/science/article/?aid=430840

Somewhat garbled Google translate: *http://tinyurl.com/6mszlt4*

So they claim they paid Rossi $15 million if I understand it right. If 
it's true, he should have been able to fund U of B research for some 
time and he did not need to sell his house.  It's a big "if", of course.

Re: [Vo]:Help in testing a E-Cat

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I have been in business long enough to understand NDAs. I have my own 
for Rossi to sign as well and it has teeth as I'm sure his does. Then 
there are the product warranties and guarantees and what happens if a 
breach / default event occurs, which we will draft. It may be only $200k 
but it is my $200k and I don't like losing money buying a crappy product.


AG


On 11/21/2011 3:41 AM, Mary Yugo wrote:



On Sun, Nov 20, 2011 at 9:07 AM, Aussie Guy E-Cat 
mailto:aussieguy.e...@gmail.com>> wrote:


As I stated, I have sent an introductory and request to purchase a
100 kW plant email to i...@leonardocorp1996.com
<mailto:i...@leonardocorp1996.com> with details of the existing
business structure and the proposed business model. I expect it
will take several days to get an initial reply and to start the
NDA / contract / agreed test conditions, etc negotiations. Oz just
about totally shuts down over Christmas and New Years for at least
2 weeks. It is our summer break and no one is at work. So I expect
I'm pushing it up a steep hill to expect to get over to Bologna
before Christmas. But I may get lucky.



If you have to sign an NDA, you may want to negotiate to exclude any 
provisions which preclude you from saying when you receive a device 
and/or are allowed to test it, the test method and the test result.  
There is no reason to include such stuff in an NDA and only a scammer 
would do so.  I believe that is what Steorn did and it's why the 
Steorn investors have never been heard from.

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat guy: Hire a local HVAC engineering company!

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

I appreciate your advise and one thing an old engineer learns is to 
never reinvent the wheel. I have learned to leverage other peoples 
experience and knowledge. If I get to the first test of a single E-Cat 
module and Rossi doesn't throw a hissy fit, you are invited but your 
costs are yours. Never thought you would ask ;) 130 kWs from that Door 
Knob reactor still make me nervous as I wonder what happens during a 
melt down? I do remember the hole in the roof P&F experienced and that 
was a pissy weak reactor compared to what Rossi has developed. Ok sure 
it stops when it melts, we hope, but what happens before it stops? If 
130 kWs was somewhat controlled, can these reactors each generated 5 -10 
times as much heat or more? Maybe bring a bomb disposal suit?


AG


On 11/21/2011 3:48 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:
E-cat guy reports that he may be able to purchase an e-cat, and he 
asked for advice about how to test it. I feel strongly about this, 
because I have spent months in on-again, off-again negotiations to 
perform a test. Since I am a veteran of failed attempts I feel I have 
special knowledge of how not to do this, so I have started a new 
thread to draw attention to my urgent suggestions.


Let me first say that if you need more money I may be able to help.

Now, let's go over what you SHOULD do and what you SHOULD NOT do:

SHOULD DO

If you have enough money to buy one of these things, you have enough 
to do the tests right.


Find someone who speaks Italian, and have them find a top-notch local 
engineering firm that specializes in testing and certifying boilers. 
(I call everyone in that business "HVAC" but boiler testing may be a 
separate category in Italy. I wouldn't know about that.)


Let this company handle everything. They have the instruments. They 
know the local regulations. They have done this thousands of times 
before. Do not hire a company that has not done it thousands of 
times. The only thing unusual about this job is that you need some 
radiation detectors for safety. They are cheap.


You stay out of their way, but I recommend you do some simple "reality 
check" tests of your own, with handheld instruments, a stopwatch, and 
a weight scale.


 Invite me!


SHOULD NOT

Do not let any large corporations or government agencies get involved.

Do not let scientists get involved. No chemists, and especially no 
physicists. They do not have the right skill set, to put it 
diplomatically.


Do not make your own instruments.

The engineering firm should use industry standard techniques only, 
with the European version of NIST certified industrial grade 
instruments. If they suggest you need a special, made-to-order testbed 
or a custom set of instruments, you are talking to the wrong firm. 
They should have everything they need sitting in the van. This should 
be a routine job for them.


Do not use high precision scientific laboratory instruments. Too much 
precision is as bad as too little. Do not invite any experts in 
laboratory calorimetry. I repeat, no physicists. If one of them shows 
up at your door with high tech, high precision instruments and offers 
his services for free, the answer is no, go away, vamoose, うせろ 
(make yourself scarce -- 
http://eow.alc.co.jp/%E3%81%86%E3%81%9B%E3%82%8D).


Do not listen to any advice from skeptics.

Ignore the peanut gallery, including me, except for practical, 
been-there-done-that advice such as this message. Notice that I am not 
offering any specific technical advice here about instruments, 
although of course I could do that.


- Jed

Re: [Vo]:E-Cat guy: Hire a local HVAC engineering company!

[Aussie Guy E-Cat]

As the purchaser, he who has the Gold, (always remember the Golden Rule, 
"He who has the Gold makes the Rules") we will issue the purchase order, 
with our acceptance test, performance, delivery, warranty / guarantee 
and other conditions such as any disputes will be heard in an Australian 
court. Been there, Done this before.


AG


On 11/21/2011 4:04 AM, Jed Rothwell wrote:

Mary Yugo mailto:maryyu...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Do not listen to any advice from skeptics.


Yikes!  Yes, by all means -- also be sure to ignore all the
history of spectacular multi million dollar scams that resulted
from involving only believers.


I meant technical advice, such as "you must do a blank when testing 
industrial-scale equipment."


Regarding scams and the like, Yugo has raised an important issue. Let 
me add to the list of things you SHOULD DO:


Hire a good lawyer to review the sales contract.



There may be other business-related issues to consider. That is 
somewhat beyond the scope of the discussion here.


- Jed